Sunday, September 30, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #384 (September 30th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Sunday September 30 -

Our Mystery Guest from last week is back again, quoting me from one of my previous Blog & Mails (Blogs & Mail?): "Yes, I was rather pleased with myself when I came up with the idea that for life on planet Earth, the ultimate hell is our sun, beside which the interior of the earth is just a mere blob by comparison."

"The idea of the sun being hell came to me while I was standing in the shower in the fall of 2002. As I mentioned in my previous letter, it was the residual or culminating experience of having researched the sun ad-nauseam for a novel. What happened was, after a long night of sun research, I had a dream that I was looking at a strange, sponge-like ball in the sky – a ball made of squirming, Keith Herring-like humans with chaffed skin and horrible faces, all crushed together. It occurred to me that this ball was massive, high up in the sky, and that the number of people forming the ball was in the billions. Cut to the following morning, I'm in the shower, and the dream imagery is coming back to me. I'm thinking, `ball in the sky…ball in the sky…made up of suffering humans…Ball in sky=Sun. Suffering humans=Hell. Sun=Hell.' As soon as I made this admittedly simple connection, I fell into a state of dread. I tried to "think my way out" of the dread, but it just pounded on in my gut. `The sun is the sustainer of life…how can it be Hell?...oh, God, let me forget this.' Well, you know what they say: once the door has been opened…

"Point offered here is, I can hardly begin to relate to the concept of being "rather pleased with myself" in light of having arrived at this idea. I have come to the conclusion that the level of dread that I experienced when originally considering the sun as hell correlated to the level of the DOG as it existed within me at the time of conception. This, in turn, gave me a great weapon against denial, because it compelled me to form a model of the sun as something that forces me to be aware of my shadow, if you will."

Well, yes, that's the sincere character flaw of being a writer. I was pleased with myself, rather than experiencing dread because I had been HOPING that I had a big finish for CEREBUS up ahead that I hadn't been aware of and that proved to be the case.

A profound sense of dread is something that predates most of my other awarenesses when it came to astronomy in general, to contemplating the vastness of the universe and the immensity of the sun relative to the size of the planets. I'd get butterflies in my stomach looking at the double-page spread in the front of the Atlas where someone had painted the planets and the sun. Here's us. Here are the other planets. Here's the sun. Talk about staring into the abyss. And yet, even with all the tricks of the commercial artistry trade, what I was looking at was dramatically understated and dramatically compressed.

Dread was my response. And yet I didn't know anyone else who responded to it in that way. Oh, yeah. The Sun. Huge. Far away. I know. So what do you want to do today?

Today? Oh, I thought I'd just SIT AND QUAKE WITH FEAR FOR A FEW HOURS. Everything about the sun terrified me. The fact that you couldn't land on it was sincerely creepy. Even if you were completely insulated from the heat, there was no surface to the sun per se. The smooth surface was a complete illusion based on the size of the thing.

Yes, it does force you to be aware of your shadow. That's a good way of putting it. Anytime I doubt that something can ostensibly appear to be physically there and, yet, actually not exist, I just have to think of the "surface" of the sun. Untold millions of miles of complete illusion. The surface of the sun does not exist.

"After grappling with the thought that the sun is hell, I came up with the following idea: the first step in returning to God is becoming light enough – as a soul – to escape the pull of the Sun. Think of the Egyptian imagery – the heart being weighed against a feather."

Personally, I try not to. I don't think anything good comes from anything Egyptian. Yes, there are pagan correlations – Cerberus, the three-headed dog that guards Hades i.e. he/she/it – but they pose a temptation in themselves. What started us on the new, modern road to hell is Egyptian, Roman and Greek revivals among the chattering classes. It's a very easy – but, to me, blasphemous -- step from there to class God as just another god and Scripture as mythology. But, go ahead:

"The idea gets a little more absurd as it goes: out of the billions of people that will live/die on the earth over the course of the earth's history, only one of us will make it past the sun. After that one soul gets past the sun, there is then a long, long (long) journey Back to God, and there are no guarantees. By "long" I mean a duration that dwarfs the lifespan of the earth. The idea suggests that the sole purpose of the entirety of the human race – past, present and future – is to produce that one (and only one) soul."

See, to me now you're getting into pagan territory that verges on complete fantasy (as in fantasy and science fiction). It's similar to what I was talking about in 289-290 but it really lets everyone off the hook. "I'm probably not that one (and only one) soul, so, Hey, let's party!" But, go ahead:

"I do think, as suggested by the above idea, that one soul might actually have what it takes to return to God, and that this soul could in fact be borne out of the cacophony that is the `millions of years of wrong choices' you refer to. The sun's response (?): once this soul is at a safe distance, the sun will `take notice' and will `reach out' to reclaim it. The sun will expand outward in chase, raining destruction down on the system of planets it has shaped and housed for billions of years in the process. `How can this be?' the sun will think. Once the sun truly sees that it is losing the soul, the desire will be to go supernova, to burst out in all directions in one last effort to catch and suck the escaping soul back and down into the resulting black hole, but the sun – not quite up to supernova snuff, thank God – will have to settle for Red Dwarf status (failure)."

Well, again, I don't think that conforms to the model which I was suggesting and which is aligned with the Koranic teaching: "We all came out from God and to Him we are returning." What you've written here sounds a lot more like Pinocchio fleeing from the whale. I don't think any model is sustainable unless it has as its foundation that redemption is available to everyone. It's always right there next to you. The journey of a thousand miles begins with but a single step. The movement you need is on your shoulder, etc. I can't see the sun as an anthropomorphized being that can (even in quotation marks) `take notice' or `reach out' or `desire to go supernova'. To me, the point of the sun is that it is an insensate, inchoate enormously large (relative to us, anyway) living consequence of bad choices. On the Grand Scale, this is where Bad Choices get you.

"Another way to say this, I think, is: we don't choose God, God chooses us. I don't think that everyone on earth has the option or even the capacity to come to an awareness of God."

I (very vehemently) disagree. I think if that was true that would constitute an indictment of God that He had condemned however many of His creations to a genuinely futile existence. That just doesn't mesh with infinite mercy and infinite compassion. No matter what, you're going to end up in Hell so you might as well have the best time you can. "Yeah – that sounds like me: no option or even capacity to come to an awareness of God. Let's party." If you're physically capable of praying: your knees work, your hands work, your voice works, then you are capable of repenting and turning to God. Everyone has the capacity to change any part of themselves they don't like and think is wrong into something that they do like and think is right. Every minute of every day. It seems to me that unless that's the case then this whole enterprise really IS pointless. I think all that interests God is that purification of the construct. No, not everyone will get Saved. But, the point is everyone CAN get Saved and that everyone has been given what they need to get Saved. No one is missing that capacity. Making use of it or not making use of it is a protected Free Will choice. No one is going to force you to Save yourself, but safety is always right there waiting. Let go of the bad choices and grab onto the good choices. Pray. You'll get there.

"I certainly believe that all humans are 100% a part of the plan of God, but that only a small fraction get a shot at wiping the dust from the feet of the saints, as it were. I would say that the act of religious conversion is only meaningful if God chooses to use the act of conversion to make someone aware – but that this method is no more or less meaningful than if God chooses to make someone aware through a dream. Or a comic book."

I'm not sure that awareness is quite the core element that you're painting it as being. As I've said elsewhere, I have an inquiring mind, so I spend a lot of time trying to "figure out" scripture, to seek out Real Awareness. But, I don't think that puts me "one up" on someone who has dutifully gone to church three times a day for the last thirty years, completely unaware of Scripture except as a backdrop for dutiful observance. In a real sense it puts me behindhand because it's as if I have to PROVE God to people: prove that the Bible isn't fairy tales, that it is actually an extremely interesting and extremely long intellectual discussion. But who has the greater faith? The person with the need to PROVE God, or the person who, just by living the way they live, is in more complete conformity with their own best aptitudes as CREATED by God?

My approach, certainly, in my view, doesn't put me "one up" on Mother Teresa. All the recent headlines on the tenth anniversary of her death about the extreme black doubt that she spent the last fifty years of her life in. "I have no faith". Much chortling among the atheists. There's a person who spent fifty years of her life with no conscious awareness of the presence of God in her life. And she knew the difference. Profound presence of God in her life, directing her to go to Calcutta to minister to the poor and then PFFT He's gone. But, the point is, she continued to do what she had been instructed to do, what she knew she was supposed to do, for fifty years. That, to me, supersedes conventional perceptions of faith and supersedes awareness by a country mile. How much more valuable in God's eyes is that? How much easier it would have been to be there every morning to whisper "You're doing a wonderful job, Mother Teresa, keep it up." But what a triumph over His adversary! "Look at that, would you? Didn't so much as brush her with My Presence for FIFTY YEARS and yet she laboured on with the patience of a true saint! Doing what she was told to do. Doing what she knew to be The Right Thing!"

Anyway, thanks for writing. Hope to hear from you again, soon.
___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________

If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #383 (September 29th, 2007) - "Gary Groth (Part 2)"



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

*************************************

DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH (PART 2)

A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!




*************************************

24 August 07

Dear Gary:

I understand that you think I'm "letting my paranoia get the better of [me]".

However, just for the record:

a) the rules of dealing with the COMICS JOURNAL – particularly when being interviewed -- are very well understood by everyone except yourself. In the same way that you have never understood that publishing comic books and doing a magazine about comic books represents a conflict of interest. Your failure to recognize the self-evident doesn't make it any less self-evident.

b) you have never run a positive review of my work.

c) I think it would be the case and in fact I think it is the case: stemming from your obvious and justified self-confidence that no one who reads the JOURNAL would ever think of me as anything but a lunatic and a crank. You're willing to publish me for the same reason that David Letterman had Harvey Pekar on his show.

d) At a specific point there is no value in expending hours of time, miles of tape and oceans of newsprint explaining why I'm not Gilbert Hernandez. I suspect that's the reason Chester Brown turned you down as well.


No, you're quite right, I should have put "that" [emphasis mine] and failed to do so. But I think it was implied and that my inferring such is sustained by your lack of a follow-up question asking Andrew to explain what he was talking about.


The "was" I will grant you, although even there Andrew was being careful to keep within the politically approved issue 50 to 100 guideline (i.e. nothing Dave Sim did post-186 can be addressed directly or anything favourable said about it) (that isn't just the JOURNAL that's the comic-book field-in-general universal consensus) and consequently your response dovetails with that. Way back before issue 186, Dave Sim had masterful comedic timing.

It wouldn't be a matter of Andrew being honest or not in answering your question, it would be a matter of the King of the Avant Garde (that's you) putting the question to him. Anyone in the Avant Garde is fully aware that you have a magazine that can crush them like an insect. He'll tell you whatever it is he thinks you want to hear. The same as any avant garde cartoonist you put a question to.

As to your being acerbic or not, well, I think you're ignoring the fact that I've been officially beneath your notice since you chose to have Tom Spurgeon do the last interview. There was no need to give me a poke in the ribs – that was what everyone else writing for the magazine or being interviewed by the magazine was for. I certainly know you well enough to know that if you want to criticize someone you will come out and do it straightforwardly. I also know that there are people you consider to be beneath your notice and I am well aware that I've been in that category for some time. I understand that you believe that expressing an interest in grilling me at length on why I'm not Gilbert Hernandez belies my being beneath your notice, but I think, on the contrary it demonstrates the category I'm in: non top-100, not Gilbert Hernandez, consequently beneath notice.

I'm not embattled, Gary, I am a pariah – that's a far more extreme form of merely being embattled. I don't let it poison my perceptions; I let the comic-book field in general take care of that. They've never let me down, yet, post-186. Fortunately, I have this unshakeable grasp of reality. Don't know where it comes from, but I'm certainly glad that I have it. Thank you for understanding my need to set the record straight.

You can relay this to Jeff from me:

I am calm, Jeff. I've been calm for thirteen years while all of you people have done your level best to destroy me. It hasn't worked BECAUSE I've been completely calm. Now, I'm -- very calmly through the Blog & Mail – reading into the record what has happened for the last thirteen years and -- you can thank Bryan Talbot for this -- revisiting your key role in that attempted destruction. I don't care and never did care what your "feelings" were about me or anyone or anything else. All I'm interested in and all I ever was interested in is reality.

Say, Gary, can I run your last two faxes on the Blog & Mail? I hate to do all this typing for nothing. I'll even quietly correct "sparring partner" instead of writing "sparing [sic] partner." How's that for generosity?

Best,

Dave

______________________________________________________



August 31, 2007

Dave-

Sorry to take so long to reply, but between running the empire and single parenting, I've got my hands full. Not that you aren't a priority, mind you.

Your last letter was pretty funny, especially in light of your boast that you "have this unshakeable grasp of reality." I believe we may agree that getting one's facts straight is a prerequisite to having an unshakeable grasp of reality. With that in mind, let's look at a couple of "facts" proffered in your last letter.

You write:

"...you have never run a positive review of my work."

This is false and I knew it was false, but I didn't have the time (and nor did anyone else in my office) to search through every issue of the Journal to compile a full list of positive reviews of your work. Luckily, I remembered that some guy by the name of Kim Thompson wrote one and found it in issue #52. It was a rave review.

First, he favorably compares you Carl Barks, George Herriman and Lee/Ditko; then, he writes:

"Cerebus the Aardvark has surmounted its origins, both stylistic and thematic, to stand on its own two...feet as a delightful and admirable work of art, and is busily propelling its creator, Dave Sim, to the very forefront of artists currently working in comics...He has chosen to put his ever increasing craftsmanship in the service of telling, in a straightforward and articulate manor, highly entertaining and witty stories featuring well-developed and affecting characters. ...Cerebus himself is delight. Tempering his initial sullenness with a wicked sense of wit, Sim has evolved Cerebus into a sterling protagonist with a sharply defined personality, bringing to light traits both positive...and negative...Quite apart from the great charm of Sim's characters, the efficient command of the comics language evident throughout the series is one of its major assets. ...Sim uses the vocabulary of comics with such lucidity and craft that the techniques, most of which are frequently paraded around with no good reason...by lesser talents, are perfectly integrated. ...those who scrutinize the alternative press in search of future masters, and then delight in charting their progress, would do well to follow Cerebus...because Sim is here to stay -- if we are fortunate."

The only way this review could've been more positive was to have written it yourself.

Despite the fact that never means never and never has a very specific meaning that does not include "in a long time," I anticipate that the loophole you will be looking for is that this review was written pre-Tangents and therefore doesn't count (as if there was a statute of limitations on "never"). So, I checked Journal #263 (November 2004) because I knew we devoted an entire critical section to Cerebus in the post-300, post-Tangents world. In it, I find a very favorable review by David Groenewegen ("In Cerebus we have a unique piece of art precisely because it maps the changing mind and views of Dave Sim," "This is a delicate balance, and to me, over the course of 300 issues, he succeeded far more often than he failed," etc.) a well as a piece by Colby Cosh that puts your political stances in a more sympathetic context by reviewing the more outrageous leftist political inclinations of Canadian civil society.

(Which reminds me; In your last letter, you boast that "six years after first compiling them in 'Tangent,' no one has been able to refute..."Sixteen Impossible Things To Believe Before Breakfast..." In fact, they were refuted, with no little panache, in the issue of the Journal I cite above, by Renee Stephen. Which fact, again, calls into question your "unshakeable grasp of reality.")

Incidentally, falsely claiming that the Journal has "never" run a positive review of your work makes the next allegation (c) untenable as well.

(And I have no idea what you mean by saying we publish your writing in the Journal for the same reason David Letterman allows Harvey Pekar on his show. Do you do one-armed push-ups or something? And how would you know why David Letterman has Harvey Pekar on his show? And how could you extrapolate from that that I have the same reasons for publishing you in the Journal. These are suppositions, however logical or illogical, and have nothing to do with any reality except the reality in Dave Sim's head. For what it's worth, my supposition is that Letterman had Pekar on his show because Pekar was funny; nothing you've written for the Journal is particularly funny, so even your internal logic isn't consistent and is certainly not a shared reality with mine or, perhaps, with anyone else's.)

Dave, it's not just your factual assertions that are flat-out false, but even your rhetorical speculations that are meant to be truthful are empirically false. Practically every line you've written here and every point you try to hammer home indicates a certain remove from reality that, cumulatively, is frankly a little scary. Where to begin, or worse, where to end?

Let's take your assertion that there's an "unwritten rule" that as an interview subject, to quote from your previous letter, "you are better off not mentioning Dave Sim, but if you do mention Dave Sim, you can say something nice about his work but it has to be accompanied by a veiled reference to his running a Nazi concentration camp for women and/or being clinically insane." When I insisted there were no such rules and that cartoonists we interview were certainly unaware of any such rules, you scoffed in your next letter and insisted that "the rules of dealing with The Comics Journal -- particularly when being interviewed -- are very well understood by everyone except yourself," implying, of course, that it's my own sense of reality that is off kilter.

For a brief and fleeting moment, I thought to myself, maybe Dave knows something I don't; maybe there is an understanding among all the Journal interview subjects that they're not allowed to talk about Dave except under the circumscribed editorial parameters he's outlined. Since we were talking about Roger Langridge's interview, I decided to check with Roger. I quoted your understanding of the unwritten rule that everyone but me was aware of, and put it to him: Were you aware of this unwritten rule? His response:


"I'm not sure, but I get the impression Andrew missed the last half of Cerebus because (unlike me) he was busy having a life, so all the homosexualist/feminist axis stuff probably slipped right past him. And I didn't mention Dave at all, although I probably should have, at least the early funny ones (High Society-era), which were quite an influence. I bought Cerebus right to the bitter end, because I felt somebody should, but there are still about eighty issues I haven't read yet. The more comics I draw, the fewer I read, oddly enough.

"So I suppose answer to your question is that we didn't get the memo. If Dave ever invades Poland I'll write the Journal a letter or something."


I believe that means his failure to mention you was not attributable to the Unwritten Rule. In other words, there is no Unwritten Rule. There was no implicit understanding on the part of Jerry Robinson or Eddie Campbell or David B. or Mike Ploog or Sophie Crumb or Terry Moore or Frank Thorne or Melinda Gebbie or Alison Bechdel or Lewis Trondheim (to name the most recent Journal interviews) that they were prohibited from rhapsodizing about Dave Sim if they wanted to. This ambient Unwritten Rule you think is known by one and all simply doesn't exist in anyone's mind but your own.


OK, what else? Oh, this is pretty funny. In reference to (d), and your suspicion that the reason Chester chose not to give an interview to me for the Journal because he didn't want to spend hours explaining why he wasn't Gilbert Hernandez: Oooops, wrong again! I'd been meaning to give Chester a call for awhile and badger him again for an interview and this gave me even more reason, so I called him, and put it to him: I gave him the context (as best I could) and asked him if the reason he turned me down earlier was because I would interview him in such a way that would betray a Gilbert Hernnadez bias that would somehow put him at a disadvantage (which is the best I can do to make out what you're trying to say) and he said, flat out, no, that had never even occurred to him. He also said to say Hi. Even better, he agreed to be interviewed in the Journal! I'll do it upon the publication of his next book, which sounds like a doozy. So, this turned out to be a win-win for me: I disprove another one of your goofy theories plus I nailed Chester down for an interview.

I decided to go back and take a look at my interview with Andrew Langridge and see if I really dropped the ball by not following up on his comment about how your work influenced him. Andrew spent a paragraph describing how your visual pacing influened him (in answer to a question from me on the subject):


"In terms of the actual timing on the page, which was generally part of the breakdown that I'd come up with in the first instance, I'd say there are a few cartoonists whose visual timing was really influential. I think Dave Sim was doing some really interesting things in Cerebus in terms of pacing on the page during the mid-'80s. Particularly sort of round issue 50 to 100 where a lot of stories were really sparse in terms of dialogue and script. A lot of attention paid to how you time a gag visually."

To which I respond, "Right, he was quite masterful at that, yes." Note, again, that I used the past tense, because Andrew was referring specifically to a certain period of Cerebus and because you're no longer drawing Cerebus. "Naturally enough," you wrote in your August 24 fax, "you cut it off pretty quickly with 'Right, he was quite masterful at that, yes." Why would you interpret an affirmative response as to your mastery to be cutting Andrew off rather than encouraging him to continue? You continue with the somewhat megalomaniacal forensic point, "You weren't going to go out on a limb and ask, 'Well, how was the way Dave Sim set up a gag different from the way gags had been set up to that point?" In fact, I didn't need to because he went on to explicate what he learned from you:


"And some of the things which we latched onto as being important were parceling out the rate if change from panel to panel. If you cram every panel with too much visual information, it stops you reading it cinematically. Because you're trying to look at every detail and the details are changing from panel to panel. It's more like looking at a still picture which you have to digest rather than reading it as a flow of images which can then have a timing to it."

The reason I infer that he was still referring to Cerebus is because I tie this back to Cerebus with my next comment (which you somehow forgot to mention in your letter complaining about how we didn't talk about you enough) when I said:

"Your approach echoes Cerebus to some extent in that it's very slow-moving in the sense that the changes between panels are very subtle," to which Andrew replies: "Yeah."

I was wondering where the hell your obsession with Gilbert Hernandez was coming from; reviewing Andrew's interview, I found out. After Andrew replies in the affirmative, the exchange continues:

Groth: "And that was calculated"

Langridge: "That's right."

And then without any prompting from me whatsoever, Andrew has the temerity to change the subject from Dave Sim to guess-who:

"One of my favorite pieces of comic timing from the time was a one-page strip that Gilbert Hernandez did called, I think, 'Homo Eruptus.'"

Two observations;

First, you completely misrepresented the flow of the conversation. (Come to think of it, isn't one of your grievances against Jeff Smith that he misrepresented a conversation between the two of you?) Not only did I say that you were quite masterful, but I followed up with another comment about Cerebus, leaving him open to continue talking about you and Cerebus. Instead, he mentioned Gilbert Hernandez and since there is no Unwritten Rule dictating that he do so, we can only assume he did so of his own volition and because he felt that Gilbert's work was also relevant of the question of his influences.

Second, do you have any conception of how ego-driven this complaint is? Most artists would be pleased if someone spent two paragraphs describing an influence, but to you, that's not enough; most artists would be happy if the interviewer referred to them as masterful, but to you this is evidence of betrayal or sabotage. No, the interviewer should've asked more follow-up questions; the interview subject should have spent -- what? -- two, four six more paragraphs talking about his influence. Really, Dave, you've got to get a grip. To paranoia, we can add a sense of persecution along with an insatiable ego, a lethal combination that wouldn't be of any help to anyone who wants an unshakeable grasp on reality.

Your insinuation that Andrew only dragged Gilbert into the conversation because he thought that's what I wanted to hear and only wanted to please me is insulting to Andrew, and your reference to the Journal's ability to crush cartoonists like insects is not only an example of paranoia but paranoia 20 years out of date. Your

reference to me as the King of the Avant Garde is risible; if anything I am a bit fogeyish in my comics tastes (though there is much to like in young cartoonists like Kathy Malkasian, Josh Simmons, Tim Lane, Jonathan Bennett, and Eleanor Davis, to name only a few). You may be an unfortunate example, much as I distrust the term Avant Garde, of yesterday's Avant Garde becoming today's Reactionary.

As for your thinking of yourself as a pariah, I have noticed an unlovely whininess that has crept into your discourse, and I'd suggest that it's beneath you. If you publicly vent opinions that the majority of those who live in liberal democracies find abhorrent, you have to deal with the response. You once argued -- here in Seattle, over coffee --that I should not have written that little essay about Carol Kalish because people would take umbrage and make my life miserable.

You were right about people's response, but I argued then and would argue now that you have an obligation to speak your mind, to speak the truth as you understand it. If that's what you think you have done, more power to you, but you have to accept that people will disagree, and their response comes with the territory. All in all, I think you've been treated pretty fairly, at least from this enclave in the comics profession. I wanted to interview you after Cerebus 300 (an invitation you turned down, as is your prerogative); we enjoy publishing you in the pages of the Journal on those occasions you offer to write for it; you are mentioned in interviews whenever the hell the interview subject wants to mention you; we run positive as well as negative reviews of your work. We treat you and your work seriously.

"Fortunately," you write, presumably straight-facedly, "I have this unshakeable grasp of reality. I don't know where it comes from, but I'm certainly glad that I have it."

This reminds of me of the old joke about the man who thinks he's Napoleon. When confronted with the real Napoleon, his logical and rational response is: "Impostor!"

Plainly, I don't see things as you do. I don't think you're quite up to speed, reality-wise. My own suspicion is that it's not so much that you are treated like a pariah by an irrational cadre of commies and homosexualists than that people, both professionals and readers, have given up on you out of frustration precisely because your grasp of reality is so shaky.

Yrs,

Gary

PS: Sure, you can run this exchange on Blog & Mail (what the hell is Blog & Mail, by the way?). Two stipulations: I'd like it run in its entirety (whenever it runs its course), and I'd like the same right to post it on our web site if I choose to. Oh, and please fix my typos; my typing is getting sloppier and sloppier.

Do you want further proof of your divorce from reality? No problem. There's virtually no line in your entire letter that doesn't indicate a remoteness from reality, whether it's a reality displaced by 15 years or so, or reality qua reality.

The proposition that I am the King of the Avant Garde is risible.

(Further response from Dave will be posted sometime after October 6th)

______________________________________________________


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Friday, September 28, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #382 (September 28th, 2007) - "Gary Groth (Part 1)"



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

*************************************

DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH (PART 1)

A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!




*************************************

23 August 07

Gary:

Hi. Jeff Smith has been shooting his mouth off again. I'll be answering his latest batch of delusions as recounted in Bryan Talbot's new book on the Blog & Mail September 13 and I figured I might as well go back to the beginning and demonstrate that the man is incapable of telling the truth.

I can't find my copy of the Trilogy Tour issue (#218) anywhere. I tried calling your 800 number but it can't be accessed from Canada. Can you fax me Jeff's version of this section in READS as recounted in his interview? It's right near the end where he says that I had depicted him in issue 186 as being down on his knees, begging me not to give away Vijaya's secret. As you can see from the attached, I never wrote anything remotely like that.

I really thought I had put an end to this crap in Columbus five years ago when he came up to the table and asked, "So where are the gloves?" and I told him, "Back at the hotel" and that's all he had to say on the subject.

Hopefully this will finally put an end to it.

Thanks.

Dave

PS. Thanks as well for not cutting Langridge's favourable remarks about me in the latest issue. That's a first.

______________________________________________________

August 24, 2007

Dear Dave--

Here you go, I assume this I what you're looking for.

I have not read Talbot's book yet, so I have no idea how he's incorporated Jeff or what Jeff said into the book, but I'm sorry this nonsense continues. I'm happy to help you (or Jeff) in terms of providing factual information for your use. Personally, I think you guys should settle it in the ring, but wait about 10 years to do it. Then, you'll be about Rocky's age, which would make it all that much more fun. lf you don't mind, I'm not going to scrutinize the issues carefully enough to take sides unless one of you sues the other.

Re not cutting Langridge's favorable comments about you in Journal interview: You're welcome. It's not that I didn't want to, mind you, but after spending so many years deleting favorable opinions about you, my conscience finally got the better of me. And it wasn't that I only wanted to do my part in limiting favorable comments about you in the public sphere (although admittedly that played a large part in it), but there were space considerations to think of -- those damned creators would fall into a rapture whenever your name came up and would prattle on about your genius. it was embarrassing. I had to spend 20 minutes wrestling them back to another subject. Really.

I will look forward to your rejoinder. If I can be of any further assistance, let me know.

Yrs,

Gary

[Excerpt of attached text:

SMITH: There's not much to tell. A lot of it was based on Dave's infamous CEREBUS #186 where he published his little "tract" about women sucking the life blood out of men, and how they can't "think", they can only "feel". He put Vijaya and I [sic] into that issue. That was unacceptable to me. He was crossing a line that he had been warned not to cross.

SPURGEON: He talked to you about it beforehand?

SMITH: He was writing [it] about the time he came out to California to stay with us during the first APE show. The night he arrived, Dave sat down on the couch opposite us and said, "Let me tell you what color the sky is in my world." Then he proceeded to lay out this horrible, upside-down, conspiracy-theory view of the world. Vijaya and I sat there, and at first we talked with him about it. We were like, "Wow. You almost have a point, sort of, but it's upside down there at the end." And he goes on for hours! Droning on and on…

SPURGEON: Dave can talk.

SMITH: Now I knew what it must've been like to be trapped in Waco listening to David Koresh! Vijaya and I were rocking back and forth, going, "Can we please go to the bathroom now?" I'm making light of it but it was really offensive stuff, and there was no arguing with him. Finally I said, "Dave, if you don't shut up right now, I'm going to take you outside and deck you."

SPURGEON: Really? Wow!

SMITH: It was that serious. Well, he shut up. There was dead silence, and he squinted his eyes. He took a drag off his cigarette, and that was it. We went on with our weekend and forgot about it. At least I did.

To read Dave Sim's version of events, go to:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cerebus/message/132526 ]


______________________________________________________

24 August 07

Dear Gary

Acerbic as always.

No, everyone doing a COMICS JOURNAL interview knows the unwritten rule, you are better off not mentioning Dave Sim, but if you do mention Dave Sim, you can say something nice about his work but it has to be accompanied by a veiled reference to his running a Nazi concentration camp for women and/or being clinically insane. In spite of his status as a completely worthless and abhorrent example of a human being, he did do some good comics. That was the "first" I was talking about – no mention of my being a Nazi or clinically insane, just something that Andrew had learned from studying my work.

Naturally enough, you cut it off pretty quickly with "Right, he was quite masterful at that, yes". You weren't going to go out on a limb and ask, "Well, how was the way Dave Sim set up a gag different from the way gags had been set up in comic books to that point?" The past tense and "at that, yes" communicate quite effectively that the storytelling skill being discussed was a) long ago and b) the exception to Dave Sim's mediocrity in all other areas (although the use of the term "masterful" is going to give all TCJ apparatchiks whiplash: absolutely no precedent for Dave Sim being "masterful" at anything except lettering). Reading between the lines, Andrew's read enough COMICS JOURNAL to know that you always need to switch to Gilbert Hernandez if you want Gary to take your point and once you get to Gilbert (or Jaime or Dan Clowes or Chris Ware) there's no going back to any previous reference.

Still, it wouldn't have taken much to just edit it down to the Gilbert reference or to change "masterful" to "sort of good at". After fourteen years in exile from the ranks of decent human beings and "only good at lettering" it was nice to have a glint in the darkness, however transitory and however illusory (and I assume that it will prove to be both).

Likewise, I assume that everyone is going to continue to be on Jeff Smith's side. I want to illustrate that the facts don't support that position, in the same way that I have Jeff Tundis run the [Fifteen] Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast at the front of each Blog & Mail entry to illustrate that our society needs to be set up in such a way to disproportionately favour women over men in order to create the illusion of equality and that the illusion of equality is not the same thing as equality. Six years after first compiling them in "Tangent" no one has been able to refute either their impossibility or the fact that they are diametrically opposed to equal treatment of the two genders and they are still known as "Dave Sim's abhorrent views on women". But, I always think that adhering to reality rather than fantasy is important, particularly if – as in these two cases – I'm the only one willing to do so.

I appreciate you getting back to me so quickly. I would've bet dollars to donuts that in your new stature (and congratulations, by the way) as the Publishing Lion of the Emergent Graphic Novel in Mainstream Bookstores, fabled in story, song and newspaper article (the NATIONAL POST, anyway) that you would delegate the task of dealing with a fanzine publisher like myself to an underling.

No, this is all I needed. Just the facts, ma'am. I wouldn't expect you to be hearing from Jeff Smith. The last thing he was ever interested in, in my experience, was the facts.

Yrs. Aussi

Dave

______________________________________________________

August 24, 2007

Dear Dave --

I think you're letting your paranoia get the better of you. Let me, first, for the record, say that I have never once edited out any favorable reference to you in a Journal interview -- or anywhere else in the Journal -- for that reason. And the only reason I add that qualifier is that there may have been an instance somewhere in those 250 some-odd issues where a reference to you was cut, but certainly not because it was favorable. Never.

(The paragraph in my last fax was, as you undoubtedly gleaned, a less than masterful use of sarcasm.)

Your implication that the Journal's (or my) bias is echoed by oo acquiesced to by creators we interview is fallacious in so many ways I don't know where to start. But, let me start anyway.

a) Creators we interview for the Journal do not follow any rules, certainly not ones we set down, unwritten or otherwise.

b) This is belied by the fact that we've run any number of positive reviews of your work, many in your post-Nazi phase;

c) It is also belied by our eagerness to run the occasional text piece by you in the magazine -- and the open invitation still stands, which wouldn't be the case if there was a blanket editorial policy to expurgate favorable comments about you from and present you in the worst possible light in our pages:

d) It's also belied by my request to interview you, post Cerebus 300 (which you politely turned down), not to mention the fact that you may be the most interviewed creator in the magazine's history (a dubious distinction, I know).


I don't believe that the word that was italicized or emphasized in the printed version of my line "Right, he was quite masterful at that, yes," so your own choice to emphasize it puts a coloration on my one sentence reply to Roger that was never intended or, indeed, conveyed — to anyone but you, which reflects more your bias, than mine.

A more generous, not to mention more accurate, interpretation, would be that the interviewer was merely concurring with the interview subject that yes, Sim's comic timing in Cerebus was masterful. Was being further proof of conspiracy, but accurate in the event since to the best of my knowledge, you have since stopped drawing Cerebus, for which the past tense is required, as in, "Fellini's use of dream imagery was masterful" -- was, because he did it in the past and is no longer doing it.

As to the unwritten Journal law that the interview subject must quickly switch from Sim to a Hernandez or some other politically approved cartoonist, I can put this to Andrew who, I hope, is courageous enough to give us an honest answer.

Although I'm still capable of being a bit acerbic now and again, and may even have given in to the temptation here, I want you to know I'm quite serious about not slyly slanting anything in the magazine to your detriment. I would consider engaging in the kind editorial sleight of hand that you suggest has been a longstanding pattern to be underhanded. If I want to give somebody a poke in the ribs, I won't hide it under a veil; unfortunately, I'm not that subtle. You should know me well enough that if I want to criticize someone, I'll come out and do so straightforwardly. Unless I have signed a legal document prohibiting me from doing so.

And I'd hope you know me well enough to know that.

I understand that you feel embattled. I often feel the same way, but I try not to let it poison my perceptions more generally, to wit: I don't necessarily think everyone will be on Jeff's side, and if it happens to fall that way -- assuming you could measure it -- it wouldn't necessarily be for the intellectually illegitimate reasons you think. Personally, I suspect most fans of your respective work won't take the trouble to take sides because neither the issue by itself nor its ramifications is that important. For what it's worth, I understand your need to set the record straight.

Also, for what it's worth, when I told Jeff that you'd be responding to whatever he was quoted as saying in Talbot's book (I still haven't seen it) -- I'm in touch with Jeff because he's drawing covers to Walt Kelly's Our-Gang book and designing Pogo -- he asked me to pass this onto you:

"Well, next time you talk to Sim, tell him to calm down. don't have any bad feelings about him anymore. He can write whatever he wants."

I wish I could revel in my status as Publishing Lion of the Emergent Graphic Novel, but that might imply that it's not a struggle every fucking day -- which it is.

Truth to tell, I delegated finding and Xeroxing the relevant pages of Jeffs interview, but there are some tasks too important to pass to an underling, such as writing to my old sparing partner.

Regards,

Gary

TOMORROW: PART 2!

______________________________________________________


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #381 (September 27th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

Margaret L, cerebusfangirl wrote me a letter June 10, regarding the 1980s CEREBUS Fan Club:

Hello Dave,

Thank you for the envelope of FRIENDS OF CEREBUS goodies! The sketch on the back gave me a chuckle. You asked for a copy of my FOC newsletter #9? Well, as it turns out – a day or so after I got the envelope from you, an auction of FOC goodies came up on eBay. They were auctioning off newsletters #7-13 and some other FOC items. I managed to win the auction and enclose the "extra" copy of #9, which is in much better condition than the one I would've made copies of for you. So now you have a real newsletter #9 for the Archives.


Thanks, Margaret!

Along with the FOC goodies from the auction, were some papers that were sent to FOC members. One of them made me wish I was a reader back then: coupons for 50% off Cerebus artwork, subscriptions, etc…though now that I look I don't see an expiration date on them…hahaha. Sure thing.

Haha, indeed, and as I recall we didn't get too many of those back at a time when I was getting – let me just check. Issue 80 just at random -- $50 a page for pages from issues 2 through 30 and $100 a page for pages from issues 30 up. So with the coupon, you'd have been paying $25 each for the early pages and $50 each for the later pages. Not a bad little return on your investment if you look at what they're going for now. I bet everyone got the 50% off coupon and went, "Wow, the art sales must be tanking. 50% off! Well, he's not going to fool me! 50% off on dead artwork. What was I, born yesterday?" I know, I know, rub it in, why don't I?

I've enclosed a copy of the coupons and also half of the Friends of Cerebus renewal notice as I have a question about it. With the August, 1984 newsletter, #12, the goodies that came with it are listed as "lapel pin" and "matches". Matches? Lapel pin? Do you have any recollection of these items? I'm enclosing a print of my site's FOC page to show you the information on the FOC I currently have which shows that with issue #12 came the "mag minder" Cerebus magnet.

Okay, let's see what we have here. On the first page and throughout the contents descriptions of the newsletter, you have the original fan club founder, Fred Patten's name spelled wrong.

The lapel pin, evidently I have three of. So you can't have one of those. I try to keep three of everything in the Archive if I can. SUPPORT YOUR PRIME MINISTER. I had forgotten all about it. Deni found a button maker somewhere. Basically you took the circular illustration, the circular lamination, put them on the button and then crushed them together in the button maker. Yep, Badge-a-minit Says so right on the back. She tried to get Karen to do them all and ended up having to do most of them herself because it was such a pain to do (and, of course, Karen being a strong, independent woman first and an employee a distant second if she didn't want to do it, she didn't do it). That was it for the buttons, as I recall.

The fridge magnet, I have 23 of, so you can have one of those.

Also I have a few of the notepads. The signed photos of Dave Sim I have a gazillion of.

In terms of things like the three-page letter from me and Karen, I had all of the fan club stuff separate for a long while and then had to make the decision as to whether to keep it separate or incorporate it into the formal Archive (8.5 x 11 and smaller) in chronological order and opted for the latter. Once you've got the notebooks done…

[for those of you just tuning in to As The Cerebusfangirl Turns, Margaret volunteered to scan all of my notebooks a while back. It was an interesting test that I couldn't win: i.e. Does Dave Sim the Evil Misogynist trust a woman with his irreplaceable notebooks?

Well, sure.

As I say, Margaret was virtually the only person who was overtly interested in Cerebus for an extended period there, certainly the only person who thought that the book's history deserved to be documented when everyone else was really just trying to decide how long it would be until Dave Sim killed himself and just how unfavourably he would be treated as a part of comics history. Not WHETHER he would be treated favourably or unfavourably, but HOW UNFAVOURABLY he would be treated.

Her closest immediate predecessor was Steve Hendricks who had been planning a Cerebus Museum from the early 80's onward. I sent him a fair amount of one-of-a-kind stuff and basically at one point he just sold it all. Didn't tell me or anything or ask me if I wanted any of it back. Just sold it all. Obviously in the Gerhard Mould of "Complete Loss of Confidence". I found out when Brian Coppola mentioned a few of the items he had bought from Steve. Oh, yeah? Sold you those, did he? Unless Brian's changed his mind, he's willing his Cerebus collection back to the Archive, so, in a sense, "no harm no foul" but…

I'm not the sort of person who forgets those kinds of things, going both ways. Steve Hendricks turning on me and Margaret sticking with me through thick and thin.

It could have been a scam. Margaret calls up all apologetic with a "dog ate my homework" story where the notebooks got destroyed – I very seldom think that the phone ringing is bringing good news and I'm usually correct in thinking that way -- but I didn't think so. Bucking a trend -- particularly when the Marxist-feminists are involved and absolute shunning is the rule rather than the exception – is not something someone tends to do for a lark, it's something they do when they're seriously dedicated, which Margaret has proven herself to be. I sent her the notebooks two and three at a time and she sent them back pretty quickly after they were scanned. In fact, she said on the podcast that Dan Parker is working on the scans to make them fully word searchable. You type in a word or a name and it will tell you where that word or name occurs anywhere in the thirty or forty notebooks. When all of that is done – and it'll be a while yet -- I'll be releasing The Complete Cerebus Notebooks on DVD.

But as I say, I can't win on that one. Had I NOT trusted her with the notebooks, that would have proved that I was an Evil Misogynist. Having trusted her with the notebooks, that meant that I had capitulated to a feminist. Which meant feminism was right. Which meant I was wrong and so on. But, after the notebooks project is done…]

…then it will be time to start on the formal Archive, 8.5 x 11 and smaller. That brings us to the matches, which were actually Now & Then Books matches that Harry had done up that had the Now & Then Books info on the one side and the illustration of Cerebus from the cover of issue 15 on the other side (which was a good illustration to put on matchbooks). I was still smoking like a chimney then, so no matter how many matchbooks I got, I ended up using them. Someone finally gave me an intact book a while back and I think I put it in the 8.5 x 11 and smaller Archive. I know I have a matchbook cover in there somewhere without the matches.

Like a lot of other things connected with the fan club, I think it will turn up when the 8.5 x 11 stuff is being scanned. Also, because you've done some advance work here, you'll be able to put what is there into more accurate chronological order. Shot in the dark, I went and checked to see if I could just flip through to the matchbooks. No go. But I did find the bookmark and the "Fight Like an Aardvark" bumper sticker right next to each other.

It'll be up to you at that point if you want to scan the Fan Club stuff twice, once for the 8.5 x 11 and smaller and once for a separate Fan Club Archive.


Also, thanks for mentioning to Jeff Tundis that you still had some first printings of the phonebooks hanging around and the trust to have the warehouse send off the bundle of phonebooks to me before I had a chance to send the money to Jeff (I only have Mastercard and AV only takes VISA, but thankfully www.cerebusart.com can take paypal over the Internet.)

Oh, hey, if you can't trust cerebusfangirl, who can you trust? As I told Jeff, I know where you people live. Yes, good opportunity to make a general boarding announcement on that one. According to the inventory list from the warehouse, as of the end of June, I still have SIGNED AND NUMBERED FIRST PRINTINGS of (quantities in parentheses) JAKA'S STORY (13), READS (178), MINDS (225), GUYS (33), FORM & VOID (58), LATTER DAYS (14), THE LAST DAY (13). Just to show what a nice guy I am, I'll let them go at cover price: same as the regular editions.

Now, watch. Everyone's going to go, "Wow, sales on the signed and numbered first printings must be tanking if he's offering them at cover price. Well he's not going to fool me. First printings at cover price. What was I, born yesterday?"

Ain't human nature the cat's pyjamas?

*************************************

TOMORROW! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH (part 1) – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Wednesday, September 26, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #380 (September 26th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

Margaret also takes issue with my assertion "It's very possible that someone doing a cerebusfangirl website is one of the few things that kept me out of jail for the last few years" saying "I doubt my website is that well known to accomplish that task." Skipping ahead to her 23 June letter:

Jeff Tundis made a good point. The point Jeff mentioned was that whenever someone searches online for CEREBUS and/or Dave Sim information on the Internet, my website is one of the top "hits" that comes up. So, while I don't view my website as a huge traffic generating website in comparison to other websites, it is a large one for CEREBUS-related information. So I stand corrected and your point does stand. My apologies.

No apologies necessary. All three of us are guessing. There is very, very limited information available on what feminism is actually doing although I think I'm safe in saying that feminism has, to date, 100% rock solid, no questions asked, totalitarian control of the debate. We have the one Larry Summers anecdote of a prominent person daring to question feminism and getting crushed like an insect. Little flurry of discussion and then everyone agrees that justice was served and it's time to move on. That's not a lot to go on as to HOW this is being accomplished but it certainly points in the direction of a lot going on behind the scenes. i.e. Crush them like insects but keep it out of the papers.

The Sixteen Impossible Things have been kicking around for a few years now and, frankly, they point in the direction of women being "differently abled". If the genders were actually equal, you would not need these "counterbalancing" societal mechanisms in order to even things up. Men and women would go into marriage with what they had and when they left they would take only what they brought in. Men pay alimony. 95% of alimony. But, you'll notice that there's no movement afoot to provide men with government assistance in paying alimony. Oh, hey, buddy, you're losing more than half your paycheque here. That's not right. We better petition the government to compensate men for any part of their paycheque they're paying in alimony that exceeds, say, 25%.

No. Why? Because that's not men's nature. Men don't go crying to the policeman or the judge or the government to kiss the boo-boo and make it all better. Men ARE strong, men ARE independent. Men just sit there and go: Well, looks like I have my work cut out for me. And they find a way to make more money. If the genders were equal, women would do the same thing. Well, that marriage didn't work out. I'm forty years old, I have no marketable skills and I've got two kids to pay half the upkeep on. Looks like I have my work cut out for me. The fact that we expect the guy to give the ex-wife half of his stuff and half of his paycheque indicates just how delusional the concept of gender equality is.

I suspect fewer men are being crushed like insects by feminism as new generations of women are coming along who are questioning the whole idea of feminism. Not in a "back to Father Knows Best" way but in a basic, "a lot of this stuff just doesn't make any sense and is consequently indefensible" way. And I would maintain that not all of the crushing that has taken place has been overt or anything you could put your finger on or indict anyone for. Women are awfully good at that, starting with their high school cliques. Nothing you can put your finger on, nothing you could indict anyone for, but flat-out malicious sadism for all that. And I suspect for a period of time, until quite recently, you needed to have a woman prominently in your corner to keep from getting crushed in just that way. Particularly if you had the reputation of being a womanizer, you weren't married, hadn't been married for a quarter of a century and showed no inclination to get married in the future, your female typesetter had quit, your female proof-reader had quit, your last two female secretaries had quit. At that point I was pretty much down to Margaret. And what does she do? She gets a Cerebus tattoo and starts covering the Internet with Cerebus material and calls herself, quite plainly, cerebusfangirl. That's why I thanked her as profusely as I did June 21 and why I do so here. As I said then, I'm sure she's paid a price for her perfidy. To which Margaret replied:

Any price I've paid for it is greatly made up by what I've gotten from CEREBUS and your essays over the years as far as educational and entertainment purposes. There are other women readers out there, and a few on the YahooGroup that occasionally "de-lurk" to contribute something meaningful to the discussion at hand. They most assuredly would vouch for you, though I cannot speak to their reasons for not doing so as I have done, other than perhaps they have a life outside the Internet :)

Well, okay. But the fact of the matter is that they didn't say anything and they don't say anything. Standing up to the popular girls' clique in high school is really no different from standing up to feminist totalitarianism. You have to actually do it: Out loud. For it to have any meaning. Thinking to yourself "I'm very cross with those girls for what they're doing" and keeping it to yourself doesn't improve the situation and certainly doesn't stop the behaviour. I appreciate (I'm sure one of your occasional de-lurking examples) Elizabeth Bardawill's support for my work, but when she tries to tell me that I'm not the Pariah King of Comics, someone else is, "that's all over with" as if that's the same thing as speaking out against my being made the Pariah King of Comics and is the same as vocally deploring the treatment I've been subjected to…well, come on, Margaret, the difference is night and day. Still, I'm glad that you feel that you've come out even or even a little ahead on the deal.

Concluding her June 21 letter, in answer to David Johnson's wondering aloud if he had scared her off with an e-mail suggesting that he would use a possible Cerebus Legacy/Dave Sim & Gerhard Awareness Group "as a springboard to promote Christianity" Margaret first pointed out that her own views on God are very private, so, respecting that, I won't quote what she had to say on the subject. She then goes on to explain:

I'd rather have a Cerebus Legacy Group or a Dave Sim & Gerhard Awareness Group for promoting CEREBUS, your essays and your other works. Those essays include whatever you've written, from "Tangent" to the Notes from the President. I don't see that as promoting Christianity, but promoting your work. Let the people read the books, the essays, and make up their own minds what to think. Some will no doubt come to the same conclusions you did in LATTER DAYS and in issue #289/290 and others might not.

As a possible member of such a Foundation (or group), I wouldn't actively promote Christianity, I would put your works out there for others to read and discover and as I say, let the people decide for themselves. Which is what I attempt to do with my website: I've "published" on the web your essays from "Tangent" to "Islam, My Islam" (requested by David Carrington of my old post, Fort Monroe). Hopefully people will come across them via the different search engines and links and read them, digest them and think about them. It is the least I could hope to do with the website.

That and sell more CEREBUS phonebooks.


Well, yes and as long as we're on the subject, it would seem to me very strange for anyone to try to promote my views as being exclusively Judaic or Christian or Islamic. At the same time, I can't specifically tell people not to do it. If something that I've written makes David Johnson think that it has made him a better Christian and he thinks it might work for other Christians, and he can "get past" the fact that I don't believe Jesus was God's son, well, that's pretty much up to David Johnson to decide. But I can state categorically that I have never knowingly leaned toward any one of the three faiths at the expense of the other two. In fact, I think that's part of our jobs here on earth is to find a way to accommodate and balance all three faiths within us.

Tomorrow: Margaret's June 10 letter re: the CEREBUS Fan Club

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #379 (September 25th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

Letter from Tim J of Raleigh, NC one of those infrequent Neil Gaiman request letters (Jeez, I hope I sent him one. That was two months ago. I'll send him another one just to be sure)

"Hi, Dave, I just had to pick up the gauntlet and write you a letter to receive a signed book…Why? Because I remember hearing you speak at Comics `Nuff Said in Charlotte, NC in the 1983 – 1985 time frame. I was 18 or 19 and while I was away at university, my two younger brothers gave away much of my comic collection to my even younger cousins and the collection was essentially lost."

"I was visiting the Comics `Nuff Said store deciding if it was worth getting that involved with reading and having comic books. As one would have it, this was the time of SECRET WARS…'nuff said. The owner of the store put me on to your comic and invited me to come back and meet you. (Oh, she was a fetching creature, flaxed blond, athletic, entrepreneurial, knew comics lore…)."


Yes, that was Norma of Biff and Norma, the husband and wife team. As I recall the "fetching creature" thing happened pretty much overnight between one signing and the next. She used to be sort of dumpy with thick glasses.

There are three shots of "after" Norma at the Aardvarks Over San Diego party on the back cover of issue (88? Nope. Just went downstairs and checked. 89. I was close) with Tony Basillicato and the Cerebus Muppet he made. Tony was very funny that night. He basically had the Muppet hitting on Norma for a good half hour or so. The shot at the bottom, at the Muppet's behest, she's helping him out of his Pope robes so he can get comfy. It's amazing what you can get away with when you have your hands inside a Muppet.


"Nevertheless, I bought the comic and came back, met you, propositioned her. I have read and kept those three CEREBUS books, THE KILLING JOKE and DAZZLER for these past twenty years. As I attempted to rebuild my collection, I got married (not to comic girl), moved to Italy, had children…comics never made it back into the rotation. Now is the time to reacquaint myself with a comic I found really interesting. YOURS. With the advent of the Internet, one of the first things I looked for was info about CEREBUS. And it was not there! I thought I had "stumped" the Internet in 1998. Today, when I got to work, I thought I would Google CEREBUS. My former failures were due to me misspelling the name. Imagine that…? Dave, I am really enjoying writing this letter. I have often pined over the demise of letter writing. Anyway, I "got" your comics twenty years ago, but as I read how the Internet expanded your "work" I realized that I missed something that I really would have enjoyed. So send me a comic. I'll read it. I will also stay up on your other "work" as they intrigue me.

"What I have: 67 OCT, "Day of Greatness, Age of Consent", 68 NOV "Another Thing Coming" 71 FEB "Hovering Below the Fray" (that is a funny title. I am fond of saying the opposite), #72. I do not have issue 67 anymore. My kids got that one."

"P.S. Two days ago my 12 year old daughter asked me about the CEREBUS comics on my bookshelf. In the plastic with the other four comics I own. They share the one plastic protector I have. It was difficult explaining CEREBUS to her. I had not got to know him/her in just three books. I reverted to classic comic geek.

"P.S. I kept the comics that made up my re-start collection @ 100 titles – all Marvel. A month ago, I stapled, taped and glued them to the wall of my garage. Very colourful.

"P.S. Leaving for work this morning there was single postage stamp on the floor. It has been there all weekend. I picked it up. I was thinking it could be used for something special. So I mailed this letter with it. Man…! This was a great exercise. Thanks for the challenge to write it."


Actually, I really just wanted to run your letter to get that weird magnified "intake of breath" sound when everyone gets to the part about you stapling, taping and gluing 100 Marvel comics to the wall of your garage. I think that's got to be worth a CEREBUS grab bag – a comic for you and one for your daughter. For your daughter, CEREBUS ZERO, for you a copy of issue 89 with Norma on the back. It'll make you feel like you're 19 again.

Okay, speaking of CEREBUS' presence on the Internet, we now have three (count `em, three) letters from Margaret L, better known as cerebusfangirl. We just did a joint interview last Saturday (September 1) on JAKA'S STORY for the Comic Book Geek Speak podcast (Big Blog & Mail hello to podcast hosts Bryan and Peter and Jamie!). Here she's commenting on my comments on the June 21 Blog & Mail (issue 283 for those of you keeping score at home and who are keeping their Blog & Mails in plastic bags with backing boards). When David W. Johnson took offence at my being labelled a "noted anti-feminist" in my Wikipedia listing – adding "even Margaret agreed" – I wrote to him:

Well you know, David, that gets into very awkward areas because I AM an anti-feminist: an unapologetic anti-feminist.

Margaret offers this clarification:

True. But I disagreed with the "noted" part, not the anti-feminist part. Because in the context "noted" appeared to be "well-known by the public". You are indeed very well known within the comics industry, but to the, as the Cerebus Yahoo!Group likes to say, "mainstream media" you're no Larry Summers, i.e. someone in the media eye for his beliefs.

Well, that gets into awkward (but interesting!) areas of what qualifies you as being a "noted" anti-feminist. If that's the primary reason that you're known in a given field – and I think it's safe to say that that is the primary reason that I'm known in the comic-book field – then what does that say about feminist emphasis (and does the phrase "lack of a sense of proportion" leap to mind)? Is the fact that I'm not a feminist REALLY the most important thing about me, compared to my having written and co-drawn a 6,000 page graphic novel? It also gets into interesting (but funny!) areas of: isn't the fact that feminists have to go all the way down to the bottom end (the independent end) of the least well-thought of medium of communication, comic books to find a "noted" anti-feminist kind of indicative of the Leninist/Stalinist society that we're living in (i.e. absolute totalitarian control everywhere else by feminist thought police)? I just read a Stalinist era riddle in the National Post the other day. "Comrade, how do you capture a lion?" "Answer, capture a rabbit and abuse him physically until he admits to being a lion."

Tomorrow: More feminist fun with Maggs!

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Monday, September 24, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #378 (September 24th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

Nate Neal sends along a copy of The Sanctuary 3 – his title that centers on a band of cavemen and cavewomen, a sincere attempt at documenting what primitive life must have been like – becoming in the process, as far as I know, the first Blog & Mail cartoonist/reader to make it to issue 3 since I started doing this. Also a short note dated May 15:

"Hi Dave – Here's issue 3. I could bore you with the details as to why it took so long for this issue to get out, but why put both of us through that? The artwork was done in December, so a huge distribution mix-up is the main culprit. I can't afford to print any more pamphlets anyway, so…looks like I'll have to finish the book in solitude. Hope things are goin' all right up Canada way."

So far so good. He printed some observations of mine on issue 2 as part of the letters page. Same thing holds true with this one. It's actually very easy to follow despite the lack of actual English in the word balloons and that most of it is told through gesture. I "read" it when it first came in and missed most of it and now I've been able to actually Read it. There's a sort of interior resonance to that quality: in order to "get" what Nate is doing you have to slow your reading down to a very primitive caveman-like pace. Dave not get this. [Turn back to the previous page] Which one cavewoman with triangles on cheeks? [study the previous page] [turn back to the page before that] [re-read the three pages]. Oh, okay. Dave get this now.

Sorry to hear that you aren't able to keep going with the serialization, Nate. Actually, I think the three issues are good stand-alone comics such as I've been discussing lately that I hope stores will experiment with finding room for. Obviously it will read a lot better when you've finished it, but the approach certainly lends itself seeing each instalment as a separate anecdote. Or maybe you could bind copies of 1 to 3 into "preview" editions of the finished work.

Anyway, if you folks are looking for a project to support, I do recommend Sanctuary 1 to 3. You can write to Nate at OM Comics, 55 Ionia NW Ave, Apt. 315, Grand Rapids, MI, 49053. Or e-mail him at natoone@hotmail.com. Thanks for keeping me on your comp list for the last year, Nate, and good luck the rest of the way! We'll be here waiting for you when you've finished Sanctuary.

What else have we got here? Oh, hey a letter from Joe Chiapetta! Yes, THE Joe Chiapetta.

"Hi Dave,

Long time no see. I just wanted to let you know that I heard your recent interview on Indie Spinner Rack and it was great to hear your Jack Bauer voice again."


Oh now don't YOU start. It was Scott McCloud who started that. That I look like Kiefer Sutherland. Now I SOUND like him?

"You really had so much insight to share in that podcast and I'm so glad I stumbled across it. It's nice to know you are still drawing and continuing your lifelong career as a cartoonist. I wish you much blessing with your photorealist project."

Photorealist projects. Plural. They breed like rabbits around here, Joe.

"It was fascinating hearing about Gene Day, early zines and your industry experience. I remember reading Gene's MASTER OF KUNG FU with my little brother and I never would have imagined being one step removed (through you) from him."

I wouldn't have pictured you as a MASTER OF KUNG FU reader, Joe, so that's make us even.

"The podcast made me think about my own origins in comics and how much your work really did have a positive impact in my own development as a SILLY DADDY cartoonist and self-publisher. The main concepts that you helped to reinforce for me are as follows;

1) a creator really can do what he/she wants in terms of content and from the heart is powerful!

2) Comics are not a second class art medium

3) Have a business plan if you want to be in it for the long haul.

4) A creator can entertain without compromising on what personally seems right to the story

5) If you say you are going to do something, do it!

So thanks for everything and God bless you. I hope we meet again some day.

Sincerely, Joe Chiapetta 2209 Northgate Ave. North Riverside, Il 60546

PS. I'm still doing SILLY DADDY (as a webcomic) It is 16 years old this year!"


AND still living at the Northgate Ave. address! Unbelievable. Here I am trying to get caught up on the mail and instead you've driven me down to the Off-White House Library to dig up my copy of the first Silly Daddy trade, THE LONG GOODBYE which reprints the first seven issues of your zine because I couldn't remember "Coach's" real name. Maria, right. The nickname, "Coach" stuck because you called her that all along and then suddenly she hit an age where she didn't want you to call her that anymore. For those of us who have never been fathers, it was a very effective moment. WHAT? But…but…Joe's ALWAYS called you Coach.

I'm not going to read the whole thing. "I Was a Shitty Father" – where you confessed to hitting Maria when she was five months old. Boy, I had forgotten that one. With that last line "Does she remember?" You did the story when she was two. "Suzy was sleeping off an argument we'd had the night before; about how Maria wouldn't listen when we'd tell her not to do something. Maria whines her way out of it and Suzy lets her get away with it." Yeah, a lot of that going around and just getting started. Creating strong, independent women. You were ahead of the learning curve in identifying that one. Flip to the back cover photo of the three of you. Suzy was a real looker. I remembered that part, too.

You always had a really primitive, infantile drawing style which is far from my favourite so it's a real testament to your storytelling abilities and your story that I remember as much of this as I do. Right #3. THE BIG DIVORCE. That was when you really started going to town with the visual symbolism, that great effect of having a doppelganger head hanging in the air next to you or Suzy or Maria, all the different covers for issue 4. Probably the best documented marriage break-up in comics history. "Coach in the Box". That was a cute one.

Well, I almost read most of it. Thanks for giving me an excuse. And thanks for the print-outs from your website. I'm writing this one down www.sillydaddy.net. I have to go to the library to look up a photo of Ghandi for Secret project #2. While I'm there, I always think. There was something I wanted to look up on the Internet. But when I'm there, I always draw a blank. 95 photos? This I've gotta see. Hope you have ordering info for your books, but at least they can check out your webcomic.

Give me a call if you're ever going to be up this way and thanks for writing.



GIANT CLAM No.2 where Ralph Kidson gets some more mileage out of the Stick & Envelope GREAT GATSBY cover I did for him back in '99. It has CEREBUS on it for you completists. Very funny stuff. Noah arguing with God about how is he supposed to get up to the polar wastes in order to get two polar bears? A Ralphie riff on Cat Steven's near death experience that led him to convert to Islam:

People who prayed to God during near-death experiences and then died.

SKELETON: Yeh, I went swimming and got swept away by a dangerous current. And I was praying like a BASTARD all the TIME for God to save me! And DID he? Did he f—k. He's f—kin' over-rated, I reckon.

RALPHIE: Hmm. You see, you don't hear from people like that because

RALPHIE: THEY'RE DEAD! All you hear from are these smug c—ts, who often only make it through sheer f—king LUCK, banging on about how they were chosen by God for a special f—king REASON.

RALPHIE: Y'know? I mean, I'm damn sure every last ONE of those poor f—kers who copped it when the tsunami hit was praying and praying and PRAYING to God like a MOTHERF—KER. Isn't it a massive f—king insult to all those deceased to say, Well GOD think I'm some HOT f—cking shit, but you all can just f—king die and it doesn't MATTER? HMM?!

BYSTANDER: Oh, sorry. What? I wasn't listening.


That's my Ralphie. Order a copy from him at 3 Langridges Close, Newick, Lewes, East Sussex, BN8 4LZ or e-mail him at ralphiek@btinternet.com

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #377 (September 23rd, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Sunday September 23 -

A previous correspondent who had become hesitant about writing to me (because he wasn't crazy about having his letters appear here) will not be identified by name. Went to the post office this morning (4 September) thinking, "I'll have to go bobbing for faith letters when I get home: the first Blog & Mail is a Sunday Edition." And, as it turns out, his letter was just waiting for me.

(He's changed his name a bit again. I don't know what that syndrome is all about, but there are people in the world who are very "name sensitive" so I try to accommodate that even though my own awareness is that names have become pretty much non-issues, at least on the ostensibly human level of reality. The ___ level might be another thing entirely. There have been women who have insisted on calling me "David" and every once in a while someone mentions that it should be "David Sim" on my books. As soon as I had a say in the matter, I became Dave. I can see the argument that an author should be named David, but I tend to think that if you write funnybooks and the Blog & Mail, Dave will do)

Anyway, he responded to my assertion about the structure of a hospital and how it seems completely incompatible with healing. I had written "Being trained to just lie there as the object of medical expert attentions takes your perceptions of yourself and your situation in exactly the wrong direction. `This has nothing to do with me. It's all up to the doctors.'" To which he replies:

"There is a big difference, however, between the doctors working in the Purgatory-like, socialist medical environment of Canada and, say, the personal, private medical staff of Tom Cruise. I would be willing to bet that Tom has a very direct rapport with his doctors, and that there are checks and balances in place. I would also be willing to bet that the kind of setting Tom is ushered into in a case of emergency is far different from the sterile catacombs of your average public hospital. The average hospital is the grand extension of the sentiment `this has nothing to do with me' – a sentiment that is, in fact, one of the core tenets of the DOG (Denial of God): `It Has Nothing To Do With Me.' Well, if you're Tom Cruise, chances are you think, `It Has Everything To Do With Me', and you've managed to put yourself into a position where you have enough power to surround yourself with the highest quality of persons in all `Tom Cruise-applicable' fields. Does this blessing of a life indicate that he humbles himself in prayer? I would guess that, on some level, he does. On some level he is a spiritual human being whose primary concern is being the very best he possibly can be day in and day out, and this kind of drive necessarily yields an eventual awareness of self, which in turn yields an awareness of God, necessarily."

Well, in these sorts of areas – which really come down to a question, in this case, of: is belief in and extreme prominence within Scientology and/or indescribable wealth and/or planet-spanning fame something that tends to incline the soul in a positive or negative direction? (best two out of three, anyone?) or "How is Tom Cruise doing, soul-wise, anyway?" – I tend to fall back on the Koran's injunction: You to your religion, and me to mine. I don't think we do ourselves any good by judging the beliefs of others. Sharing our beliefs is okay. I can happily listen to a Jehovah's Witness all day as long as I get my turn. It's always interesting to listen to an impassioned and earnest defence of a belief in Jesus' divinity. Everyone who believes in Jesus being God, I've found, has a different way of expressing it. It really is a litmus test of tolerance if they can make it through my explanation of what I see as the purpose behind the two Jesus, the Synoptic Jesus and the Johannine Jesus. I have to say that I have frankly been surprised that most do (as opposed to my expectation that most would try to brand my flesh with a crucifix or melt me with holy water).

I don't think an awareness of self necessarily yields an awareness of God. I suppose it depends on whether you mean an awareness of "ostensible self" or an awareness of "actual self". We all have a number of "selfs": family self, business self, faith self, etc. Being famous, being wealthy, being a movie star, being internationally recognizable would, for Tom Cruise, definitely qualify as self. But, presumably, none of those things are his soul, all of those things get left behind, so they are "ostensible" self. With some "actual self" mixed in. Lighting into psychiatry and psycho-active medication in a televised interview, I would suggest was "actual self" since it verged on career suicide but was a genuine attempt to communicate, soul to soul, with an audience that was probably only interested in his ostensible self. There was no way that lighting into psychiatry and the use of psycho-active medications was going to boost his price per picture, get him any positive coverage in the media or the inside track on a script he was interested in. Just the opposite in each case. But it's obviously the right thing to do. This is what I believe in, these interviews are completely pointless most of the time, let's make this one count for something.

I would tend to see Top Gun medical teams as a kind of temptation for the exact reasons that you cite. A lot of what keeps me out of hospitals in Canada is that I really can't think of anything as self-evidently wrong-headed as going in and having Vladimir Lenin poking and prodding around my vital organs. What happens to that disinclination when you replace Vladimir Lenin with a world-class surgeon who used to head up the cardiac wing at Johns Hopkins? Oh, hey, this guy is good. But is he? If the problem is demonic possession it doesn't matter if it's Vladimir Lenin, the guy from Johns Hopkins or Fred Flintstone. Cutting you open and taking something out isn't going to fix what ails you, but the temptation to believe it will goes up exponentially in a world-class medical context that's the best money can buy.

"I once wondered if I would have the stones to leave society completely were I to become fatally ill. Just head off and live in the wild until I either healed or died. I used to think that arriving at such a decision and taking the action to manifest it would require an unbelievable amount of courage whether healthy or ill. Well, as it turns out, I fell deathly ill a little under two years ago (just prior to becoming a Sikh). On the first day of sickness, I noticed some yellowing on my left arm about four inches down from the elbow, surrounding a large, grotesque lump under the skin. My thought was that it might have been a spider bite, but there didn't appear to be any puncture of the skin, not even the tiniest hint of a bite mark. Over the next several days, it got progressively worse in appearance, and I grew more ill. I reached a point, about three weeks into the ordeal, where I became sure I was dying. I considered my idea to head into the wilderness. In the end I just didn't have the energy. It never occurred to me to consider that, once sick, it wouldn't be a matter of courage, it would be a matter of energy. I was too sick to move, so I chose to remain in bed and pray. Not out of fear of death, but out of the fact that it just seemed like a good use of my time while immobilized. So I prayed for a solid week, all of my waking hours. Then, almost exactly a month after it began, I woke up one morning as strong as an ox, and the thing in my arm was gone. It had been there when I fell asleep, and was gone when I awoke. There had not been a slow fading of the yellowing skin and the lump, but a sudden departure. I stared at my arm in disbelief, rubbing the spot where the action had been, scrutinizing my skin for any sign of the thing, any hint of it having existed, but there was nothing there. From my perspective it seemed like a miracle. Point of the story: there is a part of me – maybe a big part – that wonders if I'd be here to write this had I checked myself into the local public hospital."

That's very similar to what happened to me in January. It seems to me to be a genuine test of faith. I had to keep stepping back and getting an overview. Yes, I feel like absolute crap, in fact I feel like I'm dying, yes, I have this inexplicable growth that wasn't here yesterday – but what is ACTUALLY going on? The atheistic voice in my head (I think we all have it) is saying, No, this looks serious. You should go to the hospital. But how serious was it? I mean I was sick, but I wasn't in pain, or at least not any kind of pain that I couldn't take. But what if I die? What if it IS that serious? That was the funny part. By that point in my life it was as if I was asking myself: But what if I get out of detention? What if, instead of having to stay here another fifty years, what if I get to leave tomorrow?

Hmmm.

Okay, is this a TRICK question?

But I do think it points in the direction of the temptation posed by world-class health care. Forget about the local public hospital. If you were Tom Cruise and you woke up with a growth like that and you knew that you had umpty-ump millions in the bank and all you had to do was to hit a button on your speed-dial and Ben Casey from Johns Hopkins will be there in five minutes…?

No, as you say, the best use of your time in that instance is prayer. It's just too screwy. This wasn't here yesterday, so I'm inclined to believe that it isn't actually here at all. That is, it's only here in an ostensibly physical sense. And then, as you say, it's gone.

Next week: More with Our Mystery Guest

___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________

If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

250166737825 Dave Sim Cerebus Scripture read bible dvd First Samuel
$24.99

Saturday, September 22, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #376 (September 22nd, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

What I most admire about the new ComicsPRO organization is that they are trying to be realistic and in the back of this issue of COMICS & GAMES RETAILER they have released their first position paper, so they seem to understand that DOING something is a priority. That's a very positive sign and puts them one up on the defunct DLG. Don't make people nervous. Just find a primary retailer issue, identify it, get a consensus on it (over 90%, in this case) and then publicize it.

It seems to me that what they're trying to do is roughly what I was trying to do with the Creator Summits back in the late 1980s – to establish some sensible guidelines to determine where the different levels of responsibility begin and end in the field. The Creators Summits ultimately failed because of the (to me, obvious) inherent cross-purposes represented by the Freelancer versus the Self-publisher. Scott McCloud's Creator's Bill of Rights was essentially a Freelancer document and like most Freelancer efforts over the years, it was largely if not completely toothless and thereby amounted to wishful thinking committed to paper. There is the same sort of danger here. It's a position paper, but you and what army is going to enforce it?


I'm a little more hopeful with the Retailers attempting to do the same kind of thing with ComicsPRO because they have the weight of 90 retailers representing 130 accounts behind them. It might prove to be too large and unwieldy but they have been surprising themselves at how smoothly it actually works as long as everyone is focused on the same thing: figuring out what the problems are, and solving them, rather than just whining about them or looking threatening and not doing anything.

What ComicsPRO is also doing, rather than starting with a wholesale manifesto as we tried to do, is pushing for specific changes they would like to see. In this first position paper what they would like to see is that each variant cover be treated as separate line item on the order form with its own order code so that they can order and reorder specific covers based on demand rather than the present reality where you get a fixed percentage of your order on each cover and if one is more popular than the others, you can't get more of them without ordering less-popular variants.

So here's my commitment to ComicsPRO:

First, I commit to joining the organization for the $300 or so a year. Fax me a bill at 519.576.0955 and I'll send you cheque.

Second, it seems to me that what ComicsPRO needs is some non-retailer support – I recognize the syndrome from the Creator Summits: if we had had a few more voices raised in support we might've gotten more done-- so I'm here to provide at least one voice of support. Concrete example:

I've been looking into the incentive and variant cover end of things for Secret Project #1 and Secret Project #2. So, let me just commit right here and say that if I do them, it will be in complete conformity with the ComicsPRO position paper.

It's not much, but it's a start. And I dare say it's more of a commitment than they're likely to get out of Marvel and DC.

I'm cutting my own throat in doing so because as far as I can see, the incentive and variant cover "scam" is the only way that anyone has found to get retailers to order optimistically. If you have to order 40 comic books in order to get 10 variant covers by Hot Artist du Jour, it is literally worth doing because the 10 covers are guaranteed sales which means you can take a risk on the 30 and in many cases write them off. This is even more pronounced with the incentive covers where if you get a "sketch cover" for ordering 75, you can sell the "sketch cover" for enough money to pay for the 75 and still turn a sizeable profit beside.

It also means that you have 75 comic books when you would ordinarily have only ordered 20. You might as well put them out – which is all Marvel and DC wanted you to do in the first place – and you might find that you sold 30, or 35 or even 50.

In terms of this doing any good, the actual numbers are hidden since the publishers only report the sales to retailers not to consumers. The retailer may have sold 30 instead of the 20 he thought he could sell – which is an overall good, as far as I can see – but his order charts as 75 which paints an unrealistic picture of what books are hot and what books are only hot because the retailer wants the incentive copy – which is an overall bad, as far as I can see. Treating each cover as a separate line item will correct that. The information will be more accurate than piling all four covers' sales on top of each other and saying "This is what WIZKIDS #1 sold!"

It's hard to judge how well the variant and incentive cover "scam" works, both in terms of how much it jacks up publishers' orders and how many times it compels a retailer to order more copies than he is inclined to order that then actually sell. It certainly seems better to have accurate information in all cases. If 90% of the time the retailer could sell more than he thought he could sell then the retailers aren't as good at estimating their orders as they are pretending to be. If the 90% of the time includes "additional sales" of 5% or less, then it isn't a huge problem. If 90% of the time includes "additional sales" of 20% or more than there is a larger problem. If the success rate is only 10% instead of 90% then it is far more of a "scam" than an "incentive". Essentially, as a publisher, you're murdering a lot of trees pointlessly just to create the illusion that you're way more successful than you actually are.

So, I would agree that adopting the ComicsPRO position paper across the board will provide more accurate information and accurate information will tell us whether this is a "scam" that's hurting the business or an "incentive" that's helping the business. I'm more than willing to wait for an accurate verdict before doing an incentive or variant cover.

So, there is movement on both sides. The retailers want to take away an option that I have to boost sales until there is some way to chart those sales accurately. Presumably as long as I have each variant or incentive cover as a separate line item, I'm playing ball. That's all they're asking for. So, I go them one better and say I won't do it UNTIL and ONLY IF there's enough information to determine that it's helping things.

Now, again, these are all small steps and I am one self-publisher, but unless we have these small steps none of us is going anywhere. Frankly, I don't delude myself that ComicsPRO is talking about me or self-publishers or small publishers in general – at least so far. The retail eye is always on DC and Marvel when they use a general term like "comic book industry" or "comic-book field". This is unfortunate because I think they are more apt to achieve genuine results by starting with the publishers who genuinely need them than they will with trying to change the policies of the big companies who take them for granted. So, let me circle back to Joe Field's article in the latest issue:

To put it bluntly, trying to get Brian Bendis to write more story per issue as a way to boost sales, that isn't going to happen, so discussing it is just whining.

Let me try another blunt assertion: the same is true with "on-time" delivery of comics. You know how you stop late comics? You don't order them. Same with late creators. You don't order their books. If it's late, cancel. If they offer you an order adjustment, write "0" instead of 45 or 25 or 100. And you make sure Marvel and DC know that you're doing that and you will continue to do that. Unless you're prepared to do that, again, late shipping is nothing you can do anything about because the only thing you can do about it you aren't willing to do. If you draw a line in the sand and stick to your guns, you will soon find Marvel and DC editors cracking the whip on your behalf. But you have to force them into it. They aren't going to do it voluntarily.

Conversely, if you order 200 copies of a guy's book whose last project was a year-and-a-half late you are telling Marvel and DC very specifically and directly that on-time delivery is of no interest to you. All you care about is getting 200 copies of flavour-of-the-month's book.

Your mouth is saying "No, no" but your eyes are saying "Yes, yes."


I did a monthly comic book, pretty much on-time from 1991 to 2004 and the sales just kept dropping, so it's not as if you are rewarding on-time delivery in and of itself and if you aren't rewarding on-time delivery in and of itself, then you have no leverage to urge publishers and creators to be on-time. "You aren't Brian Bendis, Dave." Granted, but I was on-time. What was my incentive to be on-time apart from my own determination to bring CEREBUS in for a landing in March, 2004 as I said I would in 1979? None.

Let me tackle the problem from a different direction. Right now I'm trying to figure out how fast I can write and draw my new project. I've done a page a day and I've done a page every three days. Over the first two weeks I got 11 pages done. So, roughly I'm at about a page every day and a half. If I can maintain that pace, I haven't got a guaranteed monthly comic (close, but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades), but I'm pretty sure I could have a bi-monthly comic. I wouldn't commit to it until I see what my pace is over the course of say three or four months. So, say by January I can tell you. It's a monthly. It's a bi-monthly. It's a quarterly. But I will only tell you what I can guarantee (acts of God notwithstanding). If I get twenty pages done in one month and only ten pages done in the other two or three months, I'm not going to tell you that I can do twenty pages a month. I would go by the least productive month or, at best, an average of the least productive month and the second least productive month. That's what I told you with CEREBUS. I told you I could do 20 pages a month and I did 20 pages a month. Now, collectively, as retailers if you won't hurt Marvel and DC by having zero tolerance of late books then that only leaves you the option of rewarding on-time books. Dave Sim has made this commitment to us, he has this track record, therefore we are swinging major retail muscle behind him and we don't care that you're bringing Wolverine back from the dead as a pre-adolescent zombie lesbian in a four issue mini-series that's shipping the same month that Dave's book is.

So, let me turn the question around, Joe. You can't – or choose not to -- make Marvel or Brian Bendis do anything, so forget about them for the moment. If I come to you in six months and say, "It's a bi-monthly. I can do 20 pages every other month and guarantee delivery." What do I get for that? As it stands, I'll get orders for 9,000 of the first one, 4,500 of the second one, 2,200 of the third one, 1,100 of the fourth one. Again, where's my incentive? The dozen or so retailers who read the Blog & Mail are able to sustain my company with CEREBUS trade sales. Why would I work twelve hours a day to end up losing money on all but the first and second issue of a new comics series? Well, yes, but then I could collect them as a trade, you say.

But, there you're arguing against yourself. Your complaint is that the field is too trade oriented, but what do you think is the net effect of cutting orders in half on each successive issue of a new periodical? At that rate, the trade had better sell in order for me to recoup what I've invested printing up 1,000 copies of issue 4 (sorry, you're right, 1,100 copies of issue 4). And that puts me in a very select Big Box Office Category in comic-book stores for an independent.

As far as I can see, the direct market has sought its own level and found it. As a creator you work as long as you can, as hard as you can when you're bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, realize that your issue-over-issue sales are always going to go straight into the toilet, get a body of work out there and then forget about writing and drawing comic books anymore. I'll live off what I've already done. Who needs the aggravation? The retailers get by on x number of backlist trades that continue to sell, and apart from that they have to stay current with the flavour-of-the-month hit parade/guessing game.

Obviously that isn't in your own best interest, Joe.

I agree with you, that unless we have regular periodicals coming out, the environment is a snake eating its own tail or, at the very least, an environment that is becoming more and more brutal on the retail level.

If you -- that is retailers in general -- won't get together and use the leverage you have with Marvel and DC to change them, then your only recourse is to change the things you can and are willing to change.

So, basically, you tell me. How do I put out a bi-monthly comic for, say, six months – the same thing I did with CEREBUS, I'll give it three issues over six months -- and have the three issues sell roughly the same (as CEREBUS did) or, hopefully, go up in sales? Here you go, you and ComicsPRO are running Aardvark-Vanaheim. You get to decide exactly how the book gets published. I know you can't guarantee sales, but I am more than willing to do everything that you think I have to do to give this book a fighting chance. When has Marvel or DC ever put an offer to you like that? That's more than meeting you halfway. That's doing everything on the promotion side YOUR way.

I'm not just saying that for rhetorical effect. As far as I can see, the ONLY hope I have of generating any sales at all on a bi-monthly title is by doing exactly what it is that the retailers think needs to be done. And to me this cuts to the heart of the issue: CAN the stores do anything to generate sales or do the stores largely just tote up the approximate numbers of guaranteed sales and then add or subtract 2 or 3 based on their gut instincts?

That is, they have five "weird independent" customers and they'd be willing therefore, to order between three and seven copies of whatever I put out. If that's the case there's really no point in my trying to promote whatever it is that I'm working on or to cooperate with ComicsPRO as an organization or with individual retailers. If the plain fact of the matter is that my new comic isn't going to have Wolverine in it, ERGO all I can expect is orders of between three and seven copies, well then let's just admit that that's the case and have done with it. But, then you have to sort of stop talking about changing the field for the better and admit that you have no interest in that: just in whining about all of the things that you'd like Marvel and DC to do that Marvel and DC will never do.

I'm not sure if it's a three-issue project or a four-issue project or an eight-issue project. I also don't know if most retailers would rather that I not serialize it and just wait until it's 80 or 100 pages and release it that way. I agree with you, Joe, that periodicals – Larry Marder's habitual entertainment – are a key part of the field. But that doesn't mean that we're right. It could be that we both have a sentimental attachment to buggy whips. Whatever help I could be with a new bi-monthly title, I might be more help with a never-before-seen trade paperback with potential "real world" appeal.



There are other problems in the way in dealing with ComicsPRO. For me to deal with 90 retailers, I risk alienating hundreds of others. That's a risk I am prepared to take and that certainly constitutes meeting you more than halfway. I'm risking a drastic drop in the sales of the CEREBUS trades to anyone who is, for whatever reason, anti-ComicsPRO. There is no precedent for test-marketing a book in the comic-book field: a creator, a book and a dedicated group of retailers focusing on making it happen in a very narrow time frame. Even if the promotion works and the book becomes a hit outside of the ComicsPRO stores as well, there is still going to be resentment and possibly a backlash. I'm also assuming a good deal of THAT risk. Everyone gets the book at the same time, but only the people kicking in time and money on their side of the fence, their 50% get the promotion and a share in the decision-making about how it's going to be done.

If it tanks, well fine. I'm prepared for that.

I go back to writing and drawing comic books and forget about publishing them or, as I've been inclined to do for a while now, go in the Will Eisner direction. Not his later graphic novels where he saw the 1973 New York Comicon and went "It's time!" and packed it in on the outside world and dove face-first into the direct market and stayed there, but rather his post-SPIRIT response which was, as he looked around the newspaper strip and comic-book field, "There's no place for me here" …whereupon he went off and pioneered the commercial use of the comics form with PS magazine and elsewhere out in the real world. As I look around the direct market, my reaction is, more and more often, "There's no place for me here." Not whiny, not belligerent, just "Face facts, Dave." That's far more my reaction than "It's time!" that's for sure.

CEREBUS is entrenched and the sixteen books sell steadily. Maybe it's time for me to go find out what else is out there in the real world. I mean, I can honestly say, I've given you guys 6,000 pages which I don't think any other individual can say. Maybe that's all that you need and maybe it's time for you to be honest and say that's really all that you're interested in.

Why do I see there as being advantages to dealing with ComicsPRO? Well, again, like all of the Direct Line Group who are still around and the new go-getter retailers, I like to think that there has to be a better way of doing things. One of the things that I think has been missing, as I've indicated here, is that the retailers HAVE to be the ones calling the promotion shots. If something works, it's going to work in every store or almost every store but it's only going to work for a while and when it stops working it stops working absolutely and immediately. As a publisher you have to be doing what works when it works and you have to be ready to stop doing it on a dime when it stops working. The only people who know what is working are the retailers, but there's really no mechanism for keeping non-retailers current on that.

So, I'm basically asking the core question: what works? I have a project that I'd like to test market and TELLING you guys how it's going to be marketed hasn't worked so, I'm all ears. I will happily do everything that you tell me to do that you think works: cover price, format, publishing frequency, overship or no overship, incentives covers, variant covers, advertising, shelf talkers, 10 cent edition, 1 cent edition, fliers, posters, bumper stickers, buttons. I can do SOME signings but I sure can't do 90 of them. So, it seems to me that if ComicsPRO is going to be something more than a talk shop, here's an opportunity. What CAN I accomplish with 90 stores? What can 90 stores accomplish with me?

There's no rush on it. In fact just the opposite. I'm more than happy to just keep the CEREBUS trades in print and enjoy the fact that I can write and draw the kind of comic books that interest me without having to worry about a) how they'll sell or b) how much money I can afford to risk on them or even if I'm going to publish them. If ComicsPRO DOES decide to work with me on this, then there's a rush – a BIG rush -- because then I'm part of that narrow window of opportunity between ComicsPRO being a successful experiment and ComicsPRO being just the latest in a long line of retail group failures.

My Secret Project #2 is really well out of the comic-book mainstream but I think for that reason alone that it has potential for Bringing in New People from the actual real-world mainstream. I have some ideas on how that might be done but it's going to take time and it's going to take money. More time than money, I think. New People are coming in to comic-book stores but they're not being drawn there or lured there and they're not coming in in significant numbers. All efforts to accomplish those three have failed spectacularly in the direct market, going all the way back to THE DAZZLER which, as some of you may be old enough to recall, was going to bring in the disco crowd and shipped, as I recall, a six-figure quantity that everyone proceeded to eat for the most part. I don't want that to happen with my secret project. I'm not looking to stick anyone with books by sounding good. I'd rather ship 10,000 and sell through 10,000 than to ship 20,000 and have the stores eating 10,000.

Yes. I'm here to meet you guys halfway. More than halfway if it comes to that. I think I've already proved that I'm willing to come more than halfway just from what I've written here.

So, now it's time to see some movement on the retailer side. If you're a retailer and you want IN on this, send me a postcard or a short letter to Box 1674 Stn. C., Kitchener, Ontario, N2G 4R2 or send me a fax at 519.576.0955. Give me your contact information and the name of the person I would be dealing with in your store. Tell me if you're a ComicsPRO store or not. If you're part of another organization let me know which one(s). Tell me what you think you would order – sight unseen – of a $2.95, 20-page test market first issue of something by Dave Sim: Secret Project #2. Lowball number and highball number. I'm happy to go "majority rule" on this. If the ComicsPRO stores outnumber the non-ComicsPRO stores, I'll do this through ComicsPRO. If another organization outnumbers them, I'll look into working with that organization. If it's all individual stores not affiliated with anyone, then I'll go with those stores and, basically, form my own promotion/test-marketing retail group. Specify if you want your participation to be secret or not. I'll print relevant responses here without attribution. I will, however, let everyone know how many stores that I heard from.

***

Tomorrow: To the mailbag!

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Friday, September 21, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #375 (September 21st, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

One of the points I think retailers miss is that if I'm out promoting my book, I'm not writing and drawing my book. If I'm writing and drawing my book, I'm not out promoting it. Consequently, retailers tend to buy a lot of books by creators they met or saw with a long line-up at conventions or who do a lot of signings or who are all over the Internet all the time and then feel betrayed when the guy's book is late or never comes out. Conversely, when you stay home and write and draw your book and put it out on time, retailers say, "You really need to get out and promote yourself and your book more." It's an irreconcilable dilemma. Completely irreconcilable. And I think understanding that and working with that is part of the 50% the retailer needs to bring to the table. There's a time to write and draw the book when the creator (or creator-publisher) needs to be left alone. Then there's a time to promote the book when the creator (or creator-publisher) needs to do that pretty much exclusively and for an extended period in order to have any effect.

But that means, frankly, no more on-going series…from anyone if the creators and creator-publishers are going to do their 50% of the heavy lifting. I think on-going series are going the way of the buggy-whip factory for the exact reason that all creators have to both create their work and promote their work. It also means retailers having to decide between a book that stays at its creative peak and comes out on time and how much creator work time they want eaten up with creator promotion.

Both. Well, yes, we all want everything, but it is an either/or. I could do a much better job of promoting my book if you give me six months to do so. The four-issue series or trade paperback or Prestige format book comes out and then that's all you're going to get out of me for a year. For six months I'm on the road and on the Internet (live) and doing signings and conventions, drumming up business for you and for me. That doesn't mean that at the end of the six months I'll have a new book out. No, at the end of the six months, after I crash for a few weeks, I can START thinking about another book. And no one can promote a book like the creator(s) of that book can. We are the irreplaceable commodity in both production and promotion.

Again, you are the people who sell the funnybooks, so as far as I'm concerned it makes more sense to do it your way whatever that way is. It's your call. Which would you rather have: Dave Sim writing and drawing for ten months and promoting for two, or Dave Sim writing and drawing for two months and promoting for ten months? I think when it comes to ComicsPRO and other groups of retailers, these are not rhetorical questions. In my case, they certainly aren't. You tell me to write and draw for two months and promote for ten, hey, I'll be glad to work with you on that. But don't complain that I only got one 20-page comic out in a year. You tell me to write and draw for ten and promote for two, I'll be glad to work with you on that, but don't complain that I only did three store signings – and what about the other 127 ComicsPRO stores? -- and a convention last year.

If you want me to promote then you have to decide how to use your own resources to help me promote my book. Having agreed 100% to a 50-50 split in the workload, I'm still never going to be able to do 130 ComicsPRO store signings in any sensible time frame. It would take me close to three years going out every weekend to make it to each store and that means no new Dave Sim funnybook for four years. Given that ComicsPRO is the smallest retail organization that exists, I think that pretty effectively puts paid to the idea of store signings as either an exclusive or even primary means of promoting my secret project.

I mean, if you can see a flaw in my reasoning, I'll be glad to hear what it is, but that looks like a "put paid" sign to me. It seems to me that the logistical impossibility points in the direction of the organization thinking outside the box as to how 90 retailers can promote one book. You can all put your names in a hat and draw out the ten stores that get a signing, but I don't think that's the problem or the solution. That means that you're not a single organization, you're 90 individual retailers. The same as if you each decide, individually, to invest $50 in promoting my secret project that $50 isn't going very far outside the front door of your store. If you pool that money, though, then you're talking $4,500 and that's going to go a lot further. $100 and you're talking $9,000.

What would you spend the money on? Well, again, I think that's up to you and in that case, I think you need to think INside the box. What works? Don't blow it all on a TV ad on STAR TREK reruns just because GEE WHIZ WE GOT 9 GRAND TO PLAY AROUND WITH. What has worked and what continues to work and delivers good value for the money invested? Do that. Treat the $9,000 as if it's your own $9,000 and not just the $100 you kicked in. Don't engage in wishful thinking. The $9,000 isn't going to bring hundreds of people into your stores so put that thought completely out of your mind. Spent wisely, the $9,000 can maybe give you a book that will sell like a mid-range Marvel comic but possibly it will sell to some new people instead of the "graying" super-hero crowd that Joe Field refers to. You might get one or two new regular customers out of it. Some local publicity. Maybe a little excitement. A LITTLE excitement. Image was fourteen years ago and probably cost retailers more in terms of overall unsold inventory and the rent you've been paying to store it than it made for you in GLITZ and EXCITEMENT. Slow and steady wins the race.

Tomorrow: what I most admire about ComicsPRO

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #374 (September 20th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

I don't know if Phil Boyle is another member of ComicsPRO, but he certainly should be if they can talk him into it. He runs a chain of seven comic stores in the greater Orlando area. This month he vents on the subject of, among other things, mini-series:

"I'm about done with a litany of mediocre to what-were-they-thinking mini-series. In the Diamond June order form there were approximately 650 comics offered – of those, more than 60 were first issues and more than 300 were #4 or under. Why is this a problem? Data. When we order any first issue we have little to no hard data to go on…Now #2 is solicited. We're still blind on data unless #1 is on the stands (which means #2 is probably late). With FOC for Marvel and DC titles, we may have one week's sales data if the first issue was on time. But one week's worth of sales data on a first issue doesn't tell us a whole lot as many fans will pick up a first issue and never look at the series again. But #3 is the magic number; we have complete date for #1 (unless #1 still hasn't shipped) and a week's data for #2. We can now get #3 "right". Then #4 is the big finale and it's all over until the next arc comes out six months or six years or never. At least with an eight-issue series, we have five or six issues of real data."

I think it's pretty obvious why there are that many mini-series. If the retailers are ordering blind, they order more books. Likewise on the #1 shipping late. That's probably intentional to make sure that you DON'T have any hard data until you order #4 – if then. If you order more when you don't have sales data, the companies will make sure that you don't have sales data. They only sound as if they're interested in cooperating with you. What they are doing is figuring out what your pattern is and how to work around that to get you to order more books and mini-series is the obvious solution. An on-going series, you have to deliver the goods. With a mini-series all you need are a good first issue cover, a plausible sounding creative team and a story hook that sounds as if it might sell. Think of it from Marvel's side: How difficult is it to get those three elements together? Believe me, that's all that they really have when they're selling you on a new mini-series. What you see in PREVIEWS is all that's been done two months ahead of the ostensible shipping date. The story hasn't been pencilled yet, the scripting hasn't been done, the lettering hasn't been done, the editor hasn't looked at anything besides the synopsis he got pitched. The only thing that exists is the first issue cover you're looking at. It's an assignment. The editor gets paid for doing what he is assigned to do. The artist gets paid for doing what he's assigned to do. They do it because that's what they get paid for. They don't do it to thrill your every customer down to their tippy-toes. Sorry to break that to you, but I thought you should know.

It's not really any different from Hollywood. All they need is a trailer that looks interesting, plausible actors and actresses and a director and an elevator pitch ("HIGH NOON in outer space") and boom, instant movie. By the time it tanks, the millions of dollars have already been spread around to everyone and there are no refunds. There aren't millions of dollars involved here, but there is tens of thousands and pretty much every nickel comes from comic-book stores. The executives get paid, the editors get paid, the writers and artists get paid and there are no refunds when it tanks. These people are not your friends. They are not in business WITH you. They are in business AT you. They are interested in getting your money out of your pockets and into their pockets. If they can do that more easily and effectively with mini-series they will do it with mini-series. If your stores go out of business as a result, they'll just switch to other pockets.

Mr. Boyle's next point is "What do you bring to the table?"

"What are you doing to bring new customers into my stores? Are you creating fans of your work outside the comic store? Are you creating an excitement about your work so that fans will be looking for your new book when it launches? Are you pushing those customers to ask retailers to buy copies of your book so that we can sell them to those new rabid fans? If you're taking out an ad in PREVIEWS and hoping that retailers will be standing in line waiting to hand sell your books then you've brought your appetite and nothing more. Retailers will happily and eagerly work with publishers but it has to be a 50/50 split to make it work."

Well, I quite agree. I think what we have never been able to figure out is what is involved in the respective 50% split on both sides of the fence. One of the problems is the idiosyncratic nature of each environment. What I could do to bring new customers into a store in Orlando is not necessarily what would work in Toronto, or Des Moines or Austin. What I could do in 1992 is not necessarily what would work in 2007. This is one of the tough nuts I have to crack in looking at my two secret projects and, frankly, I'm coming to the conclusion that it is better to leave that up to the retailers. What works in your stores? I'm the one with the new funnybook to sell but you're the one who sells funnybooks for a living. You know what works. You tell me. But you have to think in terms of what I can do for ALL stores, not just yours. That eats up a promotional budget pretty quickly.

Personally, I don't think that any of us "create" fans inside or outside the store. I think the gravitational pull of comic book stores and comic books in general is severely limited. You don't get a steady stream of new customers that suddenly becomes a tidal flood of customers. You get a trickle. Tomorrow a guy walks in you never saw before and two months from now he's one of your best customers. That, as far as I know, is how this environment works, always has worked and always will work.

And I think one of those guys who finds you on his own is worth a hundred people who came in because of the DEATH OF SUPERMAN that you will never see again. And the same is true for creators and publishers. We have our audience and that's the audience we have. I'm not going to suddenly sell ten times as many trade paperbacks because I came up with this genius promotion idea. As you say, Phil, I sell to you and you sell to your customers. The customer base everywhere is roughly the same, I think. Who would I direct my genius promotion campaign AT? People in comic book stores are as aware of the trades as they are ever going to be. Each individual will make up his or her mind when or if they are going to start reading CEREBUS. I can't affect that and you can't affect that (except, maybe, by letting them take a HIGH SOCIETY home over the weekend and bring it back if they're not interested). At the same time, work that I did twenty years ago, thirty years ago, is still producing revenue for me and for the stores who carry the trades. More trickle than flood, but steady.

I also don't think there is real excitement in the comic-book field. Excitement to me is the iPhone – all of those people lined up the night before to get one of the first iPhones when the store opens in the morning. That's consumer excitement, to be sure, but it's also pretty stupid. A week later you'll be able to get it at a much better price and you can just walk in and buy one. I don't know what I would have to do to have people camping out overnight to buy the first issue of my (possibly) new comics series, but I'll take steady sales over thirty years over an overnight flash-in-the-pan frenzy any day. Compare the back issue price on a CEREBUS #1 with any Image #1 and I think that makes the point of the one approach over the other.

I understand the plea for outside customers, for new people, and that is a big part of my thinking. I really have no interest in doing a new title that the stores will only sell to their formerly regular CEREBUS customers. That doesn't seem to be accomplishing anything. I do have some ideas but they are definitely in the 50/50 category. One of the "givens" that is inescapable is that the legwork has to be done locally and that there is legwork involved. To bring new customers into your stores, you have to go outside of your store and I don't see a lot of store owners who are doing that or who are willing to do that. I can't fly to every North American city and go out and get customers for you in your immediate geographic area. Even if I could afford it, I'm nobody. It's only in your stores that there's a remote chance of someone knowing who I am. That part – actually going out to promote to outside people -- has to be done on your side. What I'm hoping I CAN do is give you promotional material and give you an idea of where to deliver it and what pitch to use to bring new people into your store. But, let's be quite frank here. Whatever I come up with is not going to bring hundreds of new people into your store even if it works like a charm. Marvel can't suddenly bring hundreds of new people into your store. DC can't. Comic book stores are not that kind of environment. If I can bring ten new people into your store out of, say, a hundred handouts that you have to take where they need to go and one of those people becomes a regular customer, that's going to be an awe-inspiring success if it happens everywhere around North America. If all of the books you were selling were selling 200 copies a month, that's what I would have to compete with to get a fair hearing. But you have no shortage of comics that are selling three and four copies. The vast majority don't sell much more than that even from Marvel and DC. If I can come up with a comic book that sells twenty copies in each store, that's a runaway success in our market. That's not 52 or Civil War numbers, but if you look at the Diamond Top 300 those top-selling books drop off into the seven-to-ten per store range pretty quickly and then to two-to-three per store range even more quickly and then the balance of the Top 300 is selling less than one copy per store. And a lot of the sales figures on the top-selling books are "jacked" by multiple covers and other scams.

Tomorrow: I've only got two hands, y'know

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #373 (September 19th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

It's interesting to see the first tentative steps being taken by the ComicsPRO organization. That's in the latest issue of COMICS & GAMES RETAILER which jumps the queue this time out before I get down to answering the mail.

Joe Field weighs in with "Hating the Waiting" which adopts a kind of scattershot approach but seems to recognize that the "waiting for the trade" model has become nearly universal and is an unhealthy development in the long term. I agree. Joe adds the new wrinkle that the comic stores are, in actuality, helping to finance mainstream bookstore sales (their primary competitor) by letting serialized books "hold on" in comic stores until publishers and creators can cash in with the collected hardcover/trade paperback sale. He makes the excellent point that it took Brian Bendis 100 pages and five issues of ULTIMATE SPIDER-MAN to tell the same origin of Spider-man that took 12 pages for Stan Lee and Steve Ditko to tell in 1962. Joe frankly states that the publishers "fail to deliver complete and satisfactory reading experiences to die-hard completist fans."

I'm HOPING that brings him closer to my side of the argument on self-contained 48-page all-in-one, beginning-middle-and-end comics which is what I'm working on – although I can be talked into serializing at least Secret Project #2 -- but I'm not sure that Joe would see it that way. Yet, anyway. Maybe I can persuade him. What he's written here seems more a plea to Marvel editorial to compel creators to tell more story in the pages they have, as Lee and Kirby and Ditko used to so that a) die-hard readers are generated and b) die-hard readers are retained. A worthy goal, but I don't think you can get there from here.

That is, I think the argument will fall on deaf ears at Marvel and DC. With the graphic novel collection "driving the bus" the economics of the field are pushing in the other direction and economics are what decide the issue: when you need a car factory and when you don't need buggy-whip factories anymore. Brian Bendis isn't going to change his way of writing funnybooks and his editor isn't going to tell him to as long as he keeps clocking the numbers he is, presumably, clocking. I'm not sure an editor would even know how to tell a writer how to get more story into each individual instalment a la Stan Lee 1962. I think that particular density of story is now in buggy-whip factory territory. And I'll plead guilty to my share of the blame for that. It's called "pacing" and it's very different across 500 pages than it is across 12 pages. I don't think it needs to be that much different across 100 pages than 12 pages – you should be able to produce 5 jam-packed 20-page segments, otherwise I agree that the reader is getting less value for his or her money. In my own defence, I always tried to have Previews and letters pages in the book – often equivalent in page count to the story pages -- when the pacing dropped well below the "jam-packed" threshold. With Marvel and DC comics all you get are more ads.

But Brian Bendis' story density? Alas, these are the proverbial things you can't change (as opposed to the proverbial things you can change), and I think it's time for retailers to learn to tell the proverbial difference.

I'll get back to the "things you can't change" theme tomorrow but I think ComicsPRO retailers particularly need to learn the difference and in a hurry since they are still in their narrow window where they haven't proved to be a failure…yet. I like to think that ComicsPRO genuinely aspires to be something different. Even though, like me, you'd think most of them would know better by now: that nothing can be done to promote anything in the stores that isn't a Marvel or DC super-hero revamp flavour of the month. Still, you can tell that, like me, they will never stop trying to make it happen and thinking up ways that might make it happen. Even though it never happens.

A lot of them are on their third or fourth go-round with this, having started way back with Gary Colabuono's Direct Line Group of America's largest retailers in the early 90s. At this point I think they can identify whole-heartedly with Bob Burden's jape: "I've been around the block so many times I feel like my turn blinker got stuck." If I'm not mistaken they spun off from another larger group because the larger group wasn't doing anything, just whining.

That IS what tends to happen.

The DLG started when they all just decided to go to dinner with each other at one of the trade shows without a Marvel or DC rep shepherding them and picking up the check. It sounds pretty basic but it was heart-stoppingly refreshing at the time.

"I'm pulling down a healthy six figures a year, how about you?"

"Yeah, me too."

"What do you say we buy OUR OWN dinners and just talk amongst ourselves?"

They went and had dinner and Marvel and DC and Diamond and Capital City sweated bullets. What are they talking about? Why aren't we in there with them? What are they planning to do? But, ultimately, that's all they ended up doing was having dinner and enjoying making Marvel and DC and Diamond and Capital City sweat bullets. Ultimately, I think they provoked Marvel into buying Heroes World which set off that whole catastrophe, with publishers going exclusive with Diamond and which ultimately led to the demise of Capital City which, I think I'm safe in saying, wasn't in the DLG's best interests nor was it what they were trying to accomplish but, well, with great power comes great responsibility (a.k.a. use it or lose it). Going to dinner was a show of strength that just made Marvel nervous enough to buy Heroes World. I don't think we want to provoke something like that again.

Tomorrow: Phil Boyle of Coliseum of Comics, another COMICS & GAMES RETAILER columnist

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #372 (September 18th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________



OKAY, IT'S "OH, NO! NOT JEFF SMITH AGAIN"

WEEK HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL


WHERE TO HIS FAVOURITE ACCOMPANIMENT IN

THE COMIC-BOOK FIELD (CRICKETS CHRIPING)

DAVE SIM GOES ON TO SAY:



So returning to reality (as I like to do), I had come all the way to Columbus with a set of boxing gloves and, in my "Dear Jeff Smith" piece in CEREBUS 265, I had left it up to him to pick the venue, the timekeeper and the referee. It seemed to me that it would be completely dishonourable for him to just walk in at that point and tell me where and when we would be sorting this out when I had given him that much advance notice, coming in two days ahead of time to give him the most number of scheduling options, but the fact that I had brought the gloves with me indicates that it didn't surprise me that he would handle it that way. People like that are just that way: if there's a sneaky, underhanded way of doing something and a direct and above-board way of doing something, they will always pick the former over the latter, every time. Why? I'm the wrong person to ask. It's just the way those people are. Personally, I always go the other way. If there's a sneaky, underhanded way of doing something and a direct and above-board way of doing something, I pick the latter. Which is what I was doing here. Jeff had to be made to put up or shut up. I would allow him to choose the context in all particulars and weight them in his own favour whatever way he wanted to. We would insulate our hands to keep from jeopardizing our livelihoods. Jeff could pick the referee who would presumably keep him from getting seriously hurt. Presumably the biggest gorilla he could find or knew of. Presumably the gorilla would feel no comparable compulsion to keep me from getting seriously hurt if things went the other way. Fine. I had made my peace with the whole situation.

Let God judge between me and thee.

If he did just stroll in at the last minute, I assumed – again, opting for sneaky and under-handed -- he would set a place and a time for Monday, figuring that I would already be booked on a flight home (which I was) so he could say that he named the venue and the time and I ducked out. Big Tough Jeff Smith wins again. So I was already prepared that I might have to re-book my return flight or miss the dinner that I was going to buy all the exhibitors after the show if he set the place and the time that night or have to negotiate an alternative if he said everything had been arranged for Sunday which presumably he would know I wouldn't violate the Sabbath for. The last one was the trickiest one, but one way or another, we would see who would deck who and who would give who a fat lip. I sleep in track pants and a sweatshirt which would serve as athletic gear in a pinch. I had already said in the same piece that I would take my chances without headgear or a mouth-guard and left it up to Jeff if he wanted to use them or do without them.

He gestured at the table, smirking, and said, "So where are the gloves?" And I replied, straight-faced, serious and factual, "They're back at the hotel." He gave me a derisive, "Yeah, as if." look, said "Welcome to Columbus" – to which I replied "Thanks, Jeff" and then he walked on to the next table and left the room roughly ten minutes later. "Well, that was easy," I thought to myself.


Having made a point to come over to where I was sitting and to ask about the gloves, to me, established who was backing down here. Just to make sure, I brought the gloves back the following year. No Jeff. Nor has he shown up at SPACE since that second show.

The boxing gloves were among the contents of the penthouse apartment that I sold to an estate liquidation agency in 2003 shortly after the SPACE show. I didn't see any need for them anymore and in my new more aesthetic lifestyle, storage space was at a premium.

So, the issue of who was and who wasn't a coward having been established, I was pleased to shake hands with Jeff on the front steps of The Beguiling two years ago, the afternoon before the first TCAF and I made a point of seeking him out for amiable chatter over in the children's tent where he would be set up when I saw him over there, waving to him whenever I saw him at a distance that weekend and figuring the whole thing had been sorted out back at the second SPACE show when he didn't follow up on his "where are the gloves?" question with "where and when" we were going to do this and at the third SPACE show when there was no sign of him. And I haven't said a word about it since.

Until now.

And if everyone would just learn to leave the whole subject alone I won't have to say a word about it again. On the other hand, if Jeff wants to opt for the Bryan Talbot version of events, or if any one of the other hundreds of people he has told Tall Tales to over the years about what happened choose to revive the issue publicly, my offer remains open. I come to Columbus every year for SPACE.

Name the time and the place – publicly, I have no interest in any private communication with someone who says one thing privately and another thing publicly as Jeff has continued to do -- and I'll be there. I don't have as much money as I used to, but I would consider buying another pair of boxing gloves to be an investment.

A solid investment.

And if Jeff chooses to ignore this, then obviously he's the coward -- which he and I both knew five years ago after I answered his "So, where are the gloves?" question and he wandered off and which I was willing, until Bryan Talbot's book, to keep just between the two of us. I have a great deal of compassion for the "accuracy challenged" having been married to one. He backed down and that was good enough for me. I would prove that I was a bigger man than he by keeping it confidential. Anyway, he now has Bryan Talbot to thank or blame (as the case may be) – not me -- for my now, of necessity, making his cowardice a matter of public record.

Only one of us is a coward and trust me, folks, it isn't me.

Gary's follow-up fax, still full of vituperation and vilification and "Crazy Dave Sim" stuff at least contained one sensible sentence:

"For what it's worth, I can understand your need to set the record straight."

Which I appreciated. A great deal. More than I can say. One faint glimmer of light in the Marxist-feminist darkness that has surrounded me since 1994. I assume from that, that thirteen years later Gary finally (finally!) read what I wrote and read what Jeff Smith said I wrote and understood that a disservice had been performed towards me by Jeff with the full duplicity of his magazine (and the universal endorsement of the comic-book field).

Should he or Tom Spurgeon or someone else have actually read the passage in READS and compared it to Jeff's version before publishing Jeff's version and launching another wave of self-righteous Marxist-feminist trashing of Dave Sim on the Internet which lingers to this day? It depends. If we're supposed to take the COMICS JOURNAL at face value as a journal -- that is as an example of journalism, presumably yes. Presumably it should have been checked at the proof-reading stage or it would have made an interesting side-bar on that page or someone might have looked up the passage and done a follow-up question with Jeff.

Of course, I don't take the COMICS JOURNAL at face value as journalism. Far from it. It's Tabloid Journalism of the vilest Marxist-feminist sort, the comic book field's answer to Pravda and all you have to do is find yourself outside of their high school girls' clique and you know the full extent of what that means for you and for your career. Just ask anyone who has gone through it.

Jeff is drawing the covers to Fantagraphics' reprints of the Walt Kelly OUR GANG material and designing their POGO reprint collections, which I hadn't known. Gary told him that I'd be responding to the slander in Bryan Talbot's book and Jeff asked him to pass this along to me:

Well, next time you talk to Sim tell him to calm down. I don't have any bad feelings about him anymore. He can write whatever he wants.

I had to laugh. He ruins my career and incites everyone to treat me as a pariah and thirteen years later he doesn't have "any bad feelings" about me. No, I'm sure he doesn't. What would he have left to feel bad about now that I have been permanently exiled from the comic-book field and he has assassinated my character with his Tall Tales all over the world? He's done a solid job for thirteen years. He hasn't completely destroyed me, but he has come very close. I asked Gary to relay this on my behalf to Jeff:

I am calm, Jeff. I've been calm for thirteen years while all of you people have done your level best to destroy me. It hasn't worked out BECAUSE I've been completely calm. Now I'm – very calmly through the Blog & Mail – reading into the record what has happened for the last thirteen years and – you can thank Bryan Talbot for this – revisiting your key role in that attempted destruction. I don't care and never did care what your "feelings" were about me or anyone or anything else. All I'm interested in and all I ever was interested in is reality.

And there you have the reality as it stands: Jeff Smith the lying coward. We'll see if he wants to change half of that next April at SPACE.

And to the familiar sound of Marxist-feminist crickets chirping in the dark emptiness of the comic-book field, let me say here and now that I'll be happy to update all this the next time a Marxist-feminist chooses to follow in Bryan Talbot's footsteps and slander my name in public by recounting the lies Jeff has been spreading since 1994.

Tomorrow: ComicsPRO position paper on variant covers

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Monday, September 17, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #371 (September 17th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________



OKAY, IT'S "OH, NO! NOT JEFF SMITH AGAIN"

WEEK HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL


TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT HIS 1999

TRILOGY TOUR INTERVIEW AND

SEEKING AUGURIES IN ITS ENTRAILS



[I also think it's interesting – in the same way a multi-car pile-up traffic accident can be said to be interesting -- that the Marxist-feminists who exert an absolute tyranny in the comic book field and who, politically, pride themselves on deploring violence of any kind, immediately and universally leapt to Jeff Smith's side – as all of you reading this, I assume, are about to do if you haven't already -- when, if you take Jeff's version of events in the COMICS JOURNAL at face value, we were discussing a number of weirdly humorous facts that have resulted from the feminization of society – spending thousands of dollars to clean all the oil off of a killer whale's lunch, being a good example -- and Jeff, out of a clear blue sky, suddenly told me to shut up and threatened to take me outside and deck me. What kind of a way is that for a theoretically civilized human being to behave towards someone he is having a disagreement with? It's an actual question but since the odds are that whoever is reading this is a Marxist-feminist no, I don't really expect an answer. Just your usual high altitude intellectual tour de force which consists of going quiet and sullen and blocking out whatever was just being discussed] [Yes, like you're doing now] [What Jeff's manufactured after-the-fact Tall Tale really did for me, as someone who is only interested in reality, was to escalate the level of weirdness attached to the incident, the initial weirdness being Jeff suddenly and explosively reacting to a simple observation on my part and insisting that we have to stop talking about this NOW and the subsequent weirdness being Jeff feeling compelled to add, years after the fact, a threat of physical violence to his already bizarre and excessive emotional reaction to a simple conversation] [to repeat: What are you so upset about?]

[Okay, now that none of you are paying attention again, here is Jeff's version of what I wrote in READS. If you were fair-minded people – which I know you aren't, but let's pretend that some of you are – here is a living example of how Jeff Smith wouldn't know the truth if it came up and bit him on the ass:][and because you're Marxist-feminists and won't look up what I actually wrote so as to maintain your eight-year delusion that Jeff was telling the truth and is therefore Good and Dave Sim was lying and is therefore Evil, I am pleased to repeat what I actually wrote immediately after Jeff's version. Oh, you're more than welcome:]

SMITH: He wrote about it in CEREBUS #186. But in his version, instead of me threatening to give him a fat lip, he has me fawning and begging him not to reveal the true evil secrets of women in front of Vijaya. [Scared voice] "Dave, stop giving away the secrets of the universe! Please! Stop giving them away! I'll get in trouble with Vijaya!" And Vijaya is portrayed like a scheming Mata Hari, when really she was just angry and bored. [Laughter]

Okay this is actually what I wrote:

`Oh, NO! No way. Uh-uh.' Jeff Smith is shaking his head violently from side to side. He has lunged forward in his seat, his hands waving in the air, as if shooing away a large insect. All of his movements are agitated. At the other end of the couch, his wife sits, her feet tucked beneath her, calmly smoking a Marlboro Light. Her features are inscrutable.

Viktor Davis takes another sip of his beer.

`You'd agree that Death is Male?" he asks.

`Yes"

`You'd agree that Birth is Female?'

`Yes"

`Which one is winning?'

`No. No, no way. It's just not true.' He stares straight ahead for a moment or two and then looks at Viktor Davis. `I just don't think that way, man. I just can't see that at all.'

Vijaya grinds out her cigarette in a small glass ashtray.

At Jeff's insistence, the discussion ends. They agree to disagree. Viktor Davis isn't certain what the disagreement is, but clearly an impasse has been reached.

They begin to discuss animation instead.


[For the two or three Marxist-feminists still reading at this point – I know, I don't believe anyone is still reading at this point either, but let's pretend that some of you are still playing along with our home version of the game and you don't have access to a dictionary] [Well, obviously you have access to a dictionary, but you're Marxist-feminists. You aren't going to go and look up a word if it means that it will prove another Marxist-feminist to be full of hot air:]

inscrutable – not readily investigated, interpreted or understood: MYSTERIOUS (i.e. "God, thy judgements are inscrutable" Robert Browning)

There is no pejorative connotation for the word inscrutable. It was the most apt adjective I could find to describe Vijaya's complete non-reaction. She didn't look angry and she didn't look bored. Jeff looked angry. Vijaya was completely blank. That was what I found remarkable. Jeff is going ballistic over…I don't know what, considering that we both agreed that Birth was Female and Death was Male and the former is, factually, exceeding the latter by a wide margin… and Vijaya isn't going ballistic with him but also doesn't say, "Jeff, calm down. What are you getting so excited about? We're just talking." If there was something to get extremely upset about, why isn't Vijaya getting upset? And if there's nothing to get extremely upset about, why isn't Vijaya more concerned about Jeff's erratic behaviour?

[It's an interesting basis for speculation – again, for another time, again, I'm sticking strictly to the facts here -- to wonder at the psychological transference that Jeff's unconscious mind obviously engaged in: translating what I actually said into what his unconscious mind had decided he needed to believe that I had said. Where did he get the "fawning and begging" thing from? Where did he get the "giving away the secrets of the universe" thing from? The "true evil secrets of women" thing from? The "getting in trouble with Vijaya" thing from? None of those are in there, not even remotely. I'm not, as you all know, big on psychiatry to say the least. To me, it's simple demonic possession. Unclean spirits. But, for those of you who do believe in psychiatry, what do you make of this bizarre and excessive form of transference? Where, psychologically speaking, do you suppose it comes from?]

[The important thing from a Marxist-feminist standpoint is that it worked like a charm. Frank Miller went on record as saying that he too would find it intolerable if a guest in his house had insulted Lynn. My universal pariah status – which continues to this day -- was assured. My question, in "Dear Jeff Smith": "How did I insult Vijaya?" was ignored, both by Jeff and by the comic-book field in general. I'll ask it again, "How did I insult Vijaya?" No response. Exactly.]

Tomorrow: Okay, back to reality…

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Sunday, September 16, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #370 (September 16th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Sunday September 16 -

It's true, at some point Margaret L asked about the possibility of
my running more scripture commentaries here on the Sunday edition.
I'd be happy to oblige, but there are some problems with that. I
can't really run the Mark Commentaries yet since the beginning part
is either what needs fixing or at least what needs looking at now that
Chester has pronounced it "hard slogging". I'm not sure that's
really the case: I think Chester tends to overestimate the extent to
which he took to the Torah Commentaries in LATTER DAYS like a duck to
water. I seem to remember more than a few pointedly doubting questions
after he had read them for the first time. That might be the case here.
If he re-reads the Mark Commentaries a few months from now he might find
that a lot of his objections have disappeared. But, be that as it may,
it's not really on my front burner right now.

Then I thought about just running whatever my latest commentaries are.
Unfortunately, in this case that would be Luke chapter 12 which I just
finished my preliminary commentaries on last night (September 2).
Commentaries on 53 verses that runs 25 pages and, as far as I can see,
it is a single discussion through proxies between God and YHWH on the
role and nature of materialism in the proto-synagogue or New Tabernacle
(that is, the Christian Church in vitro – I've been calling it
the proto-synagogue up to now but happened to read about the
inauguration of the Tabernacle in Exodus 30 to 40 – my Torah reading
from yesterday – and thought that New Tabernacle is probably a more
accurate designation). So, it's very difficult to figure out what I
could run here. Any random excerpt is probably going to need to be
supported by ten pages of lead-in and then leave the curious reader (if
there is such a thing) hanging on Where does the discussion go from
there? So, I thought maybe I could just run what I see as the crux or
the turning point of the discussion, which to me comes at 12:13.

< Said ___ (however someone out of the crowd) to him, "Teacher say to
the brother of me to divide with me the inheritance." >

The single blank signifies that it is a ___ of no exceptional
importance, although I think whoever the ___ was, he got a nudge from
God to say what he did. It still functions on the two levels both as a
surface request from a wronged party in an inheritance dispute and as an
assertion reviving the "elder brother/younger brother" metaphorical
construct of the on-going debate between God and YHWH (i.e. Ishmael and
Isaac, Esau and Jacob, Aaron and Moshe, etc.) indicating that if the
Synoptic Jesus' teaching prevails, YHWH will have sole command of
the inheritance, that is the proto-synagogue.

< The ___ (however ____) said to him, "Man who set me down judge or
divider upon you [plural]?"

It's the question posed to Moshe in Exodus 2:14 by a contentious
Hebrew whom Moshe has asked, "Wherefore smitest thou thy fellowe?"
[2:13]:

< And he said, who made thee a man, a prince and a judge over us?
Intendest thou to kill me as thou killedst the Egyptian? And Moshe
feared and said, Surely this thing is knowen >

Presumably it's an inadvertent remark on the part of the YHWH, an
emotional outburst because an attempt is being made to divert he/she/it
from indoctrination into arbitration. The problem comes in because of
the nature of that indoctrination which presupposes that the Synoptic
Jesus IS just such an arbiter and judge, telling people to follow his
commands and to trust in the Spirit Holy rather than God, the religious
authorities in the synagogue, government officials and all other
authorities. The voice in the crowd jumps to the implication of that
teaching just as the Synoptic Jesus has jumped to the anxiety-causing
implications of following his teaching. If the "double blank"
reply/question isn't treated as rhetorical (and presumably it
wouldn't be by the more devout and insightful listeners), the
question cuts to the heart of the teaching itself: Who DID set down the
Synoptic Jesus as Judge or Divider "upon you"? Counselling them to act
blasphemously, seditiously and rebelliously UPON synagogues, UPON
government officials and "the authorities"? And why would the Synoptic
Jesus ask the question when he has already led everyone to the inference
that the answer is God? If it is any other answer, then he's
counselling blasphemy.

The double blank signifes a high level ___. My guess would be YHWH using
the words of the unnamed Hebrew in Exodus 2:14 to signal that a
comparable situation is in effect. Just as the unnamed Hebrew didn't
know he was addressing the one who would bring The Law to the Chosen
People, so the inquirer didn't know that he was addressing the New
Lawgiver, the Synoptic Jesus. The fact that the inquirer was a single
blank and the response came from a double blank level would presumably
add weight to the response on the ___ level [i.e. I am comparable to
Moshe in my authority but I'm not here to judge your piddling little
affairs as Moshe did before he appointed the Judges (Exodus 18:25-26)]

Even the awkward syntax points toward high level self-anointing and can
be just as easily read as

< "Man, who (me) set down judge or divider upon you?" >

which is forensically accurate since the idea for the Judges in the
first place came from Moshe's father-in-law, a priest of Midian and,
presumably, another "front man" for YHWH. So it would probably have the
inner resonance of truth to both ask and answer the question from the
double-blank level. "Man, who set down judge or divider upon you?" "It
was me who set down judge or divider upon you." The two merge into "Man,
who (me) set down judge or divider upon you?"

Okay, we're really hitting the outer boundaries of what polite
Marxist-feminists will tolerate even on the Sunday Edition, but I'll
go one verse further:

< He said, however, toward them, "Be you [plural] seeing and be you
[plural] guarding yourselves from all covetousness, because not in the
to-be-abounding-to-anyone the life of him is out of the ___s existing to
him."

Having undermined the thrust of the question and its potential to force
the YHWH away from indoctrination and into endlessly distracting
arbitration (and having done so on the human and ___ levels) the YHWH
now needs to amplify the teaching in a way that distracts from the core
question he/she/it has just raised about the source of the Synoptic
Jesus' authority and onto a less contentious avenue of thought.
He/she/it does this by addressing the question that has been raised
which provoked the response, again answering the question on the human
and ___ level. Rather than arbitrating a dispute about an inheritance,
he/she/it instead denounces the covetousness which is the root of the
dispute. The point isn't to find a way to divide material prosperity
equitably, it is to recognize that genuine prosperity has nothing to do
with the material. He/she/it goes even further in suggesting that
existence itself is merely ostensible (presumably on the human and ___
levels) and that in the human and ___ contexts "to-be-abounding" to
ANYONE (NO exceptions) the life of him (again, human and ___) absolutely
nothing "is out of the ___ existing to him."



It's a potentially disastrous train of thought for the YHWH to
pursue. Genuine awareness that all existence is merely ostensible limits
the number of subjects that can be taught to those focused exclusively
on super-existence (for humans, the ___ level, for those on the ___
level, the double blank level). That leads directly to the knowledge
that only spirit (or ___ if you prefer) is actual and that God is the
ultimate spirit. Ultimately, that excludes YHWH which is, in fact, what
ultimately happens in Christian theology where God becomes divided
between Father (God) Son (Jesus who is God) and the Holy Spirit. At
best, YHWH manages to retain a slight identity as another way of saying
"God" which is very different from the usurpation of God's stature
which was the underlying purpose of the proto-synagogue, New Tabernacle
for the YHWH.

Okay, that was two verses. I've got 51 more here in the chapter 12
commentaries. Flood my mailbox with postcards demanding it and I'll
run some more, but I really think this is about the outer boundary of
what people will put up with (Margaret and Steve Peters aside).

___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________

If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Saturday, September 15, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #369 (September 15th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________



OKAY, IT'S "OH, NO! NOT JEFF SMITH AGAIN"

WEEK HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL


HERE IT IS AT LAST, FOLKS!

THE REASON THAT YOU'RE ALL SUPPOSED TO

SHUN DAVE SIM AND VILIFY HIM AND

SNEER WHENEVER YOU MENTION HIS NAME.

YOU KNEW THERE HAD TO BE A REASON SOMEWHERE

RIGHT? WELL, THIS IS IT, FROM JEFF SMITH'S

INTERVIEW IN THE COMICS JOURNAL BACK IN 1999:



SMITH: There's not much to tell. A lot of it was based on Dave's infamous CEREBUS #186 where he published his little "tract" about women sucking the life blood out of men, and how they can't "think", they can only "feel". He put Vijaya and I [sic] into that issue. That was unacceptable to me. He was crossing a line that he had been warned not to cross.

[This was interesting to me in that the only line I had been warned not to cross was when I had told my then-horizontal-mamba-partner (1992-1994) Diana Schutz how READS was going to be structured: along the lines of Truman Capote's "Cote d'Azur" – real comic-book people and incidents fictionalized in the first half, then shifting to an actual documenting of what was going on in my life at the moment that I was writing the concluding issues and seeing what the result was in juxtaposition with the Cerebus vs. Cirin wordless battle in the comics parts of the stories. She said, "Leave me and my family out of it."

Which I was more than willing to do.

The only interesting person in the extended Schutz family – the then-current members, anyway -- on a "Cote d'Azur" basis that I could see was her sister Trishie who had only been interesting when she was going out with Joe Matt and only because Joe documented their relationship in an interesting and humourous way. As soon as they broke up Trishie vanished into obscurity along with the rest of Diana's relatives. I did use a lot of the comic-industry dirt that Diana trafficked in extensively and compulsively told me about no matter how many times I told her I hate gossip and I don't like listening to it. How Jeff Smith could be construed to be part of Diana Schutz's family is an interesting Marxist-feminist story in itself, but unfortunately a YHWH speculation for another day: here I'm sticking strictly to the facts, ma'am]

SPURGEON: He talked to you about it beforehand?

SMITH: He was writing [it] about the time he came out to California to stay with us during the first APE show. The night he arrived, Dave sat down on the couch opposite us

[This isn't true. I was seated on a single chair at right angles to the couch. Jeff was at the near end of the couch to my right and Vijaya was at the opposite end of the couch]

and said, "Let me tell you what color the sky is in my world." Then he proceeded to lay out this horrible, upside-down, conspiracy-theory view of the world. Vijaya and I sat there, and at first we talked with him about it. We were like, "Wow. You almost have a point, sort of, but it's upside down there at the end." And he goes on for hours! Droning on and on…

[This isn't true either. What I was doing was responding to Jeff's conversational question when we had arrived at their A-frame house atop the San Andreas fault – he had picked me up in a limousine at the San Francisco airport -- "So what are you working on?" What the hell. I had nothing to hide. Literally. I described the structure of READS, with the fictionalized comic book first half and then, in the second half, moving into a more literal "here's what's going on in my life right now," and I explained some of the anecdotes that I was working with, newspaper stories I had been accumulating that had been getting weirder and weirder as soon as I began collecting them: particularly a recent one that I had found about some environmental group which had spent an unearthly amount of money cleaning spilled oil off of a seal and had then had this ceremony releasing it back into the wild where it was promptly eaten by a killer whale.

My thesis was that life was out of balance and these ludicrous excesses of Life Uber Alles (now pretty well swept under the rug beneath the label of "politically correct" – as if that justifies them) were becoming more the rule than the exception. But I was aware that most people saw the killer whale eating the seal as a Profound Tragedy instead of seeing it for what it was: what killer whales, you know, do. This is, presumably, what Jeff meant by "upside down there at the end". I was viewing a Profound Tragedy and seeing it as a Weird Burlesque.

So, I attempted to tackle the question from another angle: For the first time in human history birth was exceeding death by a wide margin but we were still behaving as if death was this near-universal condition and that birth was barely able to stay ahead of it. Essentially, we were still selling ourselves (as a society) on the view that we live in a tragic, death-based patriarchy. My view was that it was a lunatic, out-of-control birth-based matriarchy and had been for some time. At that point, Jeff and Vijaya became part of the point of my story I was working on. As I wrote:

"Oh, NO! No way. Uh-uh." Jeff smith is shaking his head violently from side to side. He has lunged forward in his seat, his hands waving in the air, as if shooing away a large insect. All of his movements are agitated. At the other end of the couch, his wife sits, her feet tucked beneath her, calmly smoking a Marlboro Light. Her features are inscrutable. Viktor Davis takes another sip of his beer.

[a Heineken, and not only a Heineken but a bottle Heineken: Jeff and Vijaya definitely had good taste in beer, unless they had bought it specifically for me]

"You'd agree that Death is Male?" he asks.

"Yes."

"You'd agree that Birth is Female?"


"Yes."

"Which one is winning?"

"No. No, no way. It's just not true." He stares straight ahead for a moment or two and then looks at Viktor Davis. "I just don't think that way, man. I just can't see that at all."

Vijaya grinds out her cigarette in a small glass ashtray.

At Jeff's insistence, the discussion ends. They agree to disagree. Viktor Davis isn't certain what the disagreement is, but clearly an impasse has been reached.

They begin to discuss animation instead.


[Deciding to do READS the way I did it, was really a matter of my saying to myself, "I really have to start documenting some of this stuff that keeps happening to me, because it is really getting to be too weird for words and everyone is acting as if their reactions are normal and my observations are weird." And Jeff's extreme and agitated reaction to a simple discussion about the balance between life and death in the world – coupled with Vijaya's complete non-reaction – was definitely in that category. "This is so weird. What IS he so upset about?" I was a guest in their home and I think I'm a very accommodating guest. You don't want to talk about a subject, boom, subject dropped. You asked me what I was working on and I started to tell you and then you freaked out. No problem. Let's – very calmly and rationally, so I hopefully don't upset you that badly again -- talk about your background in animation.]

SPURGEON: Dave can talk.

SMITH: Now I knew what it must've been like to be trapped in Waco listening to David Koresh! Vijaya and I were rocking back and forth, going, "Can we please go to the bathroom now?" I'm making light of it but it was really offensive stuff, and there was no arguing with him. Finally I said, "Dave, if you don't shut up right now, I'm going to take you outside and deck you."

SPURGEON: Really? Wow!

SMITH: It was that serious. Well, he shut up. There was dead silence, and he squinted his eyes. He took a drag off his cigarette, and that was it. We went on with our weekend and forgot about it. At least I did.

[There are a couple of interesting things here: first, "it was really offensive stuff, and there was no arguing with him." Well, it seems to me that if a point I'm making is "really offensive" then it should be easy to refute. If a devout Muslim told me, as an example, that Jews are pigs and monkeys, which many of them believe, it would be pretty easy to just say, "No, Jews are human beings. They just have different beliefs from you." Call it the Sixteen Impossible Things Syndrome. It's not actually offensive, it's reality. You, as a Marxist-feminist, only react to it as being offensive because you have strong in-built prejudices against reality. Just explain to me why it is critically important for us as a society to lower standards for soldiers and policepersons and firepersons so that we have more women in those professions and how that is more important than having high standards where public safety is concerned. See, you get offended because you want half of every profession to be made up of women. But to do that you have to erode standards. That's not offensive, it's factual. The fact that birth is outrunning death by a wide margin in our society isn't offensive, it's factual. The person who has a problem is the one who thinks that the correct reaction to the enunciation of a fact is to react emotionally and explosively. Except in a Marxist-feminist society where the correct reaction to a fact that doesn't conform to Marxist-feminist prejudices is always to react emotionally and explosively.]

Monday: The other interesting thing about this

Tomorrow: Cerebusfangirl inquires about the possibility of more scripture commentaries.

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Friday, September 14, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #368 (September 14th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________



OKAY, IT'S "OH, NO! NOT JEFF SMITH AGAIN"

WEEK HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL


I always try to do the right thing. The only time it becomes really difficult is in a case of severe demonic possession where I am presented with a Gordian Knot which presents me with one of several unpalatable and unacceptable options. In the case of Jeff Smith's interview in the Trilogy Tour issue of the JOURNAL, I have to admit that it took me about a year to try to untangle what the right thing to do was. If someone is running around saying that he threatened to deck you when he did no such thing, is it the same thing as threatening to deck you? Ultimately, I decided it was infinitely worse, particularly since it was only in the COMICS JOURNAL in 1999 that this delusion on his part had become public. However, it was pretty obvious that this was the story he had been telling people for five years whenever they asked him about the split with Dave Sim. It was also pretty obvious that everyone believed him. There was certainly an urge to correct the misinformation right away, but there was also the awareness that five years worth of damage to my reputation had been done, that the damage was irreparable and that six months or a year wasn't going to make a whole lot of difference. I was already universally hated and if I dared to suggest that Jeff Smith hadn't been wholly consistent with the truth (to say the least) it would only serve to make me that much more universally hated. The coward's way out was obvious: let Jeff Smith's version stand for all time and hope that grovelling before and capitulating to Marxist-feminists would allow me to retrieve some sort of status in the comic-book field.

[Okay, I got to this point in the narration of events and I started realizing how much of the back-story I have to relate in order for people in the distant future to understand. I mean, I know that my generation is a write-off and the generation after that is a write-off and the generation after that is a write-off – the best I can hope for, at least for the next two or three decades, out of this explanation is a completely feminized "Violence is so ICKY! Only an evil person would commit an act of violence in this day and age" coupled with "Jeff Smith can't possibly be at fault so whatever Dave Sim did to provoke him to threaten violence must have been REALLY, REALLY EVIL!" Witness the reaction to the Sixteen Impossible Things. You can't discuss things sensibly with a block of cement. But, for the sake of those people in the far-flung future who once more take an interest in reality:]

When I read the interview in the Trilogy Tour Issue, my primary response was to feel sorry for Jeff Smith as I feel sorry for anyone who has completely let go of reality in order to embrace a manufactured delusion in place of reality (i.e. feminists). I mean, I knew what I had written in issue 186 and comparing what I had written and what he was claiming I wrote in his COMICS JOURNAL interview the extreme variance was glaring.

It's nothing I wasn't familiar with.

My ex-wife and several of my girlfriends were in the category in question. They literally couldn't relate an incident the same way twice. It's an easy thing to check. If they tell you a story and it just doesn't sound right, wait a couple of days and get them to tell it to you again. If it's one of the unreal stories that they feel compelled to tell (and it is a psychological condition: or, as I prefer to call it now, demonic possession) it will be inconsistent from beginning to end every time they tell it. I couldn't find my copy of the Trilogy Tour issue of the COMICS JOURNAL (#218) when it came time to write "Dear Jeff Smith", but I basically said, look, just read what I wrote and read what Jeff is claiming that I wrote.

"Ultimately, Jeff's going to look really bad out of this," I thought, and I felt bad about that on his behalf, as I always felt bad when I saw that someone Deni had befriended had twigged to her condition and was now putting a lot of distance between them. The fact that these people can't help themselves is really saddest part of their natures.

What I failed to reckon with (as usual) was the extent to which facts and reality have nothing to do with what the comic book field -- universally dominated by Marxist-feminists -- responds to and how it responds to it. It is already immersed in the same condition so it tends to perceive reality based on its own prejudices (i.e. anyone who isn't a Marxist-feminist is evil) and to ignore anything a Marxist-feminist does wrong so long as they remain a card-carrying Marxist-feminist. Obviously, Jeff was and is very much in that category. It meant that "ultimately" kept getting pushed further into the future. At first "ultimately" was "when people compare the text in READS with what Jeff is claiming that I wrote." Then "ultimately" was "when CEREBUS fans compare the text in READS with what Jeff is claiming that I wrote." Then "ultimately" was "when someone who is interested in reality compares the text in READS with what Jeff is claiming that I wrote." That's where it stands now. My conservative estimate being that interest in reality – as opposed to Marxist-feminism – probably won't arrive for at least fifty to a hundred years.

[To this day, I don't want to call anyone bad names – I trade off "Marxist-feminist" for "misogynist": you call me a "misogynist", I will call you a "Marxist-feminist" – but even someone whose…distortions…effectively ruined my career and my professional reputation…well, let's just say that Jeff didn't completely invent out of nothing the "Big Johnson" Bone Tall-Tale-Telling character who compulsively blows everything out of proportion in STUPID, STUPID RAT TALES (if you catch my drift)]

Well, returning to reality (which I always like to do) no one compared the two texts. It was then that I realized that this was what the comic store environment had degraded itself into: a high school girls' clique. Jeff was a Marxist-feminist and was therefore IN and Dave Sim was an anti-feminist and was therefore OUT and, consequently, facts had nothing to do with it. As with a high school girls' clique. The dominant female decides who is going to be excluded and everyone goes along with it if they know what's good for them. If you ask them WHY the one girl was excluded they couldn't tell you. There are no facts, no reasons, just a natural compulsion to exclude someone that is a core part of female nature, a soul-deep delight in the harshest forms of emotional sadism of which they can conceive, the same sort of female nature that has, obviously, been running the comic-book field at least since 1994. I mean, to the extent that even CEREBUS readers – many of whom still claim to be fans of mine (with fans like this, who needs enemies?) – didn't bother to read the two versions.

To this day.

So, okay, I phone the Fantagraphics 1-800 order number to buy a copy of the Trilogy Tour issue. It's been eight years and I'm still the only person interested in reality and it's a matter of face it, Dave, if you don't do it, it isn't going to get done. The 800 number doesn't work from Canada. So I send Gary Groth a fax asking if he can fax me the relevant quote from Jeff's 1999 interview and – just for the sake of explanation – I faxed him the actual text from page 241 of READS. I also thanked him for not editing out the favourable reference to me in Andrew Langridge's interview in the latest issue of the JOURNAL.

Definitely a surprise but the return fax comes in, like, the next day. Full of sneering sarcasm about my reviving this "nonsense" and letting me know that I had absolutely no stature or credibility in the field – how else would I know it was actually from Gary? – but, give the devil his due, with the excerpt requested. I was flattered considering that I am universally viewed as the lowest form of scum in existence in the comic-book field. I figured I would get a snotty phone call from an underling and I could give them my VISA number over the phone for the copy of issue #218. Or maybe they would just fax me the information. I really didn't think I was still in the category of meriting an actual letter from Gary Groth.

Why? Well, this is The Big Reason right here. You ready for it? For those of you who have been never quite sure of WHY you're supposed to vilify and ignore and disparage Dave Sim – I mean, you've read 186 or READS and you've been left wondering exactly what the big deal is supposed to (even theoretically) be, as some people were starting to do by 1999 – let Jeff Smith clear up the confusion for you. Here, right here. This is why Dave Sim is an evil misogynist who deserved to have his career ruined, his character assassinated and to ensure that no good and decent person would speak to him (if they knew what was good for them) or acknowledge his presence ever again, amen:

Oh, heck. We're out of time. Hey, why don't you track down your own copy of COMICS JOURNAL #218 and look it up yourself so you'll be prepared to rationalize it away tomorrow and thereby restore what you know to be true: Dave Sim is EVIL!

*************************************

COMING SOON! DAVE SIM IN DIALOGUE WITH GARY GROTH – A BLOG & MAIL SPECIAL!

*************************************

AUCTION ALERT!!


The auction by The Hero Initiative for Dave Sim's "Ultimate Spider-Man" #100 tribute cover is now underway on eBay.

300151501136 HERO ULT SPIDER-MAN #100 ORIGINAL: DAVE SIM



*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #367 (September 13th, 2007) + AUCTION ALERT!!



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________



OKAY, IT'S "OH, NO! NOT JEFF SMITH AGAIN"

WEEK HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL


Sad but true. So, as has become our new custom here on the Blog & Mail we'll start this new session – and our second year -- with a progress report on YHWH's War on Dave.

Everything is pretty much "status quo" with both Secret Project I and Secret Project II on hold – work is progressing on both, but I'm definitely starting to feel like Israel here. If I can make it through one working session in between Blog & Mail stints without being attacked I'll be happy to talk about peace (i.e. scheduling the projects).

Not really sure if this latest attack constitutes "progress" from his/her/its point of view – on the one hand its got a proven track record of rallying everyone to the Anti-Dave side of the fence and taking the focus off of feminism, on the other hand, it's got all the appearance of "a dog returning to its vomit" which could suggest that YHWH has pretty much used up his/her/its resources artillery-wise and is now having to repeat his/her/its self. That would be the optimistic way of looking at it and by this point in my life I have learned to be extremely wary of any form of optimism. But, looking on the bright side if the entire comic-book field doesn't stampede away from me as they did in 1994 and 1999 after reading the following then I think I can be safe in saying that we've been eyeball-to-eyeball for thirteen years and the YHWH just blinked. Thanks, as always, to the dozen or so retailers reading this who continue to order the CEREBUS trades and if some or all of you feel compelled to join in the stampede at the end of "Oh, No! Not Jeff Smith Again" Week and never again order the CEREBUS trades, well, nothing new there and no hard feelings.

So anyway, here's how it "went down":

The TCAF weekend got off to a bad but completely familiar start when I ran across Bryan Talbot's new NATIONAL INQUIRER-style volume on the comic-book field which had just come in at the Beguiling. Sad to think that this is the degraded level to which the author and artist of the classic Luther Arkwright and One Bad Rat has sunk, but there you go. As per usual, the Marxist-feminists, unable to counter the Sixteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast, resort instead to character assassination. March 30 of this year, my Technical Director and Research Assistant on the secret project wrote to me:

"By the way, speaking of Jeff Smith…I don't want to meddle in your affairs, but I wanted to make sure you knew that Jeff has continued to say nothing but nice things about you and CEREBUS in the press."

The subtext being: don't say anything more about the contretemps between the two of us: which is always the subtext in the comic-book field. I haven't said anything, privately or personally, and I always find it irritating when the Marxist-feminist comic-book field behaves as if I have, selling themselves on their collectivist Crazy Dave Sim the Evil Misogynist party line. It's always the Marxist-feminists who revive the controversy and then blame me for responding to the character assassination being perpetrated against my reputation, which always amounts to Big Tough Jeff Smith staring down weak (and a new addition this time out) out-of-shape Dave Sim who proves to be a coward. Look, folks: I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings in your Good Jeff Smith/Evil Dave Sim construct, but there is only one obvious source for this calumny and that's Jeff Smith himself. I have no doubt that Jeff continues to say nothing but nice things about me in the press but obviously he is telling a different story at restaurant tables on his many globe-hopping world travels, pumping himself up into the Marxist-feminist Defender of the Faith and bane of evil misogynists everywhere. Or do all you Marxist-feminists think that Bryan Talbot just manufactured this pile of horse manure on his own out of whole cloth? I think I have the right to defend myself and, yes, you're all more than welcome to roll your eyes theatrically at this point, but here we go again:

What actually happened – my lips to God's ear -- was:

SPACE organizer Bob Corby came up to me about an hour into the SPACE show in question and said, "I don't know how you want to handle this, but I thought I should tell you that Jeff Smith just walked in." I thanked him for letting me know and continued to talk to the occasional fan coming by for an autograph or a sketch. My reputation having been completely destroyed by the Marxist-feminists at that point, my table, post-1994, has been seldom "crowded with fans" as Talbot maintains. There was certainly no one at the table except me when Jeff had made his way around the exhibit room – having stopped to talk to a number of exhibitors and to buy a couple of books from them (which I thought was nice of him, local hero and all – it would be nice if he would do it again someday).

It's literally the only time in my life that I made no move to shake hands with someone that I knew when he or she approached. He had behaved in so completely under-handed and dishonourable fashion towards me over our political differences after I had devoted any number of hours to answering his many questions about self-publishing and had made prodigious efforts on his behalf after he gave me the first few issues of BONE at a Capital City Trade Show (he was desperate for help with his comic book which was going in the toilet – the Cap City Show was a make-or-break proposition for him -- and at Larry Marder's behest he came to the table I was sharing with Martin Wagner and asked me for any help I could give him which I then proceeded to give him as I tend to do with anyone I think I can help to this day) that I just could not bring myself to extend the courtesy of a handshake to him.

[It's one of the unhappy repercussions of my experiences with Jeff that even though I continue to help people, I take it as a given that they will all turn on me at the first opportunity as he did. I certainly noticed – and notice -- that no one I had helped over the years had said a word about my treatment post-1994. Helping people is still the right thing to do, so I do it. Believing that cartoonists are decent human beings who remember people who helped them is something I have learned to place in the "wholly mythological" category. Live and learn.]


As far as I was – and am -- concerned, I had met Jeff more than halfway. I had notified him by letter well ahead of time that I would give him the opportunity to make good on his imagined threat of "decking me" or "giving me a fat lip" and told him to name the time and place. I came in two days ahead of time for the exact reason of giving him as many scheduling options as possible.

By that point, I had been – and continue to be -- pretty gracious, I think, about the entire comic-book field turning against me and had accepted my pariah status and the fact that I was completely without any friends or allies anywhere in the comic-book field, high or low – as I am to this day (handful of exceptions duly noted) -- without complaint. You do what's right and if everyone else chooses to do what's wrong – as the comic-book field unanimously chose to do and continues to choose to do -- well that's their choice and, ultimately, they have to live with the consequences.

That's one thing.

However, calling me a coward in print and saying that I backed down from a threat of unprovoked physical violence, as Jeff did, well, that was in a whole different category. That had to do with my personal honour as a man. You're certainly at liberty to call me a coward and say that I backed down from a threat of unprovoked physical violence so long as you do it in tried-and-true Marxist-feminist fashion – that is, behind my back and in secret -- but, if you make the assertion in a public venue like the COMICS JOURNAL, ultimately, you have to back that up. Or back down. I waited a year after the JOURNAL interview to write "Dear Jeff Smith" because I was annotating FORM & VOID in the back of CEREBUS – basically writing the "To Ham & Ham Not" material that appears in the back of the trade at the same time as I was serializing the story. I wasn't about to interrupt something important like that for something as ridiculous as Jeff Smith acting tough five years after the fact.

Tomorrow: On the other hand…

*************************************

AUCTION ALERT!!


I have been informed by The Hero Initiative that Dave Sim's "Ultimate Spider-Man" #100 tribute cover will be auctioned off on eBay starting TOMORROW, September 14th.



*************************************


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Wednesday, September 12, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #366 (September 12th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________



Wrapping up SCOTT "ANUBIS" BERWANGER WEEK HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL. Scott's dream of hand-crafted boxed sets of the ANUBIS minis to sell at SPX has gone the way of the dodo. So, what is he going to do?

So what am I going to do?

I just said that.

Found a company on the net called Comixpress. They are a full service POD printing house for independent comics. It seems very simple to get signed up, the way they have it set up. You can view their site at www.comixpress.com if you want to. They also sell the actual comics they print from their site. They have categories for action/adventure, superhero, fantasy, alternative, horror, sci-fi, spiritual/religious, and a few others that aren't coming to mind just now. Have a lot of new talent to showcase, too. You can see it all on their site if you go to it. It seems great.

From what I understand, 600-page volumes don't have a good cost ratio for POD pricing. So, I'm going to alter my plan and divide ANUBIS into (roughly) 200-page volumes and get them printed by Comixpress. As of today's date, I have almost enough material for six 200-page volumes, constituting Book I, and about fifty pages left to write and draw before the conclusion of Book I is resolved. And for the next stretch of road that's what I'm going to concentrate on: the art and story. Once I've gotten Book I completed I'm going to begin doing the digital prepress for the Comixpress edition of Book I and get working in the direction of having them print my stuff. 2008 is probably going to be a mix of digital prepress, sketchbook work, script writing and whatever else falls into the act of planning for Book II. I'll be able to release a 200-page volume every two years or so. Also, I'm thinking it might be a very good idea to keep making the mini-comic individual issues. Why? Well, if it's going to take me two years to put out a new volume, it would be helpful to anyone interested in following the story in real-time to be able to get the story in mini-comics form. And I KNOW how to make mini-comics. I've been doing a great job on it just this past year. There's a real art to it, actually. I'll send you the revised Book I in mini-comics format once I'm done with it (but it won't be as a boxed set).

I don't claim to be a revolutionary in the comic book business as you had intoned in your COLLECTED LETTERS book. And maybe, after witnessing how I fumbled through my own ideas of how to disseminate ANUBIS, you will agree with me: I'm not a revolutionary. If anyone's revolutionary, it's the people in the POD business.

I'm just pursuing my dreams.


Ask them how many people walk in the door with six 200-page volumes ready to go. You're a revolutionary, Scott. Deal with it.

Okay, and that brings to an end Year Number One of the Blog & Mail. Hope you're all still having a good time.

Tomorrow: OH NO, NOT...


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #365 (September 11th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

Here on this most unhappy anniversary – the first time it has fallen on a Tuesday since the actual tragedy -- I'm wrapping up the carry-over of Scott Berwanger Week from last week with his two most recent letters.



This one's from July 21:


Dear Dave,


Thought it would be a good idea to follow up the barrage of distressed publishing schemes I sent you a week or two ago, to let you know where my head is at. After coming out the other side and surveying the scene, I am still most interested in putting together boxed sets of mini-comics and exhibiting them at trade shows. Although the impulse to turn ANUBIS into a business venture is attractive at a glance, I realize that if I keep my grassroots model going, I'm likely to get better results on the book aesthetically. Plus it's more fun doing it my way even if I have to sacrifice a more widespread degree of recognition. Just going through it mentally, I am made aware that the pressure for things to be productive and/or lucrative puts a strain on me artistically. I'm a lot like the archer who gets better marks competing for clay vessels than the archer who competes for gold chalices, or the fellow who can walk a straight line, but if elevated to the height of a rooftop ledge, loses his footing out of fear of falling.


I also think that working a day job is probably more secure than trying to make a go of it with small-press book sales. Even though business is horribly slow right now at the company I work for, it is preferable to what I would have to endure as a self-publisher. And things will pick up eventually. I just gotta stay happy. And that shouldn't be too hard to do, not if I've got ANUBIS!



Well, yes, these are all your decisions to make. If your gut instinct tells you that the grassroots approach is going to be better for the book aesthetically, then you should stick with the grassroots approach since you've already decided that your primary interest in the book is aesthetic. I think that definitely gives you an enormous level of creative invulnerability. You're not relying on the book to provide you with a livelihood so you can make all of your decisions on the basis of what will make the book look the best and read the best IN YOUR EYES.


I think that's certainly one of the great strengths of the model that you've chosen. By producing the book with no specific idea in mind of how you're going to publish/print it or disseminate/distribute it you're able to get as close as possible to the ideal of pure creativity. Although on a much smaller scale, my 49-page secret project turns out to be in the same category. It wasn't until it was done that I actually looked at it in the context of the marketplace and immediately saw that the driving ambition behind it – to do a self-contained, affordable comic book for Real World People that stores could use to show them what the comics medium is capable of – was diametrically opposed to the marketplace as constituted and, if fact, couldn't be further away from what the market is "looking for" right now. So I turned 180 degrees practically as soon as I was done. All the way through I planned to solicit the book as soon as I had my part finished – couldn't wait to get it out there! – and now I am definitely in no rush, a release date is the furthest thing from my mind.


I'd suggest that you might go through the same kind of thing. A project that you're working on has a certain presence in your life. A project that is finished has a separate presence in your life. Moving from the potential to the kinetic state creates a whole new sense of reality. Which is not to say that the potential state is misapprehended or inherently false. That is, I don't think it's a matter that the project would have come out better had I known all along that I would be in no hurry to publish it when it was done. I think I needed to believe that I would publish it right away in order to put in all the time on it that I did. The fact that I didn't have to sit down and talk seriously to Gerhard about how we were going to publish it, when we were going to publish it, how much money I wanted to invest in promotion was really what moved it to the front burner at Aardvark-Vanaheim and made it a full-time project. All those decisions would be mine alone. They didn't need to be negotiated or debated. Okay, full speed ahead. Some pages are going to take two weeks to do, some I can get done in two or three days. But instead of picking away at it, I locked into getting page 18 done. Then page 19. Then page 20.


The fact of the matter was that all those things still needed to be negotiated and debated – but not with Gerhard, just with myself. I thought that I had them all negotiated and debated and then found out that I hadn't even started. Now, I've started and I've realized that I have to see the secret project in context – in the context of Aardvark-Vanaheim's publishing plans and in the context of the comic-book marketplace. And I couldn't do that until I got my nose out of the secret project and was no longer micromanaging every square inch of it and that wasn't going to happen until it was done.


The biggest decision I made this week? New caption borders on pages 8 through 49. According to my TD & RA doing that is apt to take another two weeks on the production end. When I see them I might decide to go back to the old look. But I won't know until I see them.


It's a mysterious line of work we're in, Mr. Berwanger.


And now Scott's latest letter from August 4:


Dear Dave,


First off I want to apologize from the bottom of my heart to you, for being a bother.



Well, again, you're not a bother. As I said earlier, we both have a great loyalty and devotion to the comic book/graphic novel medium. You're exploring a whole new way of going about it so you're the only one who can really document what the process is like and, hopefully, be a pathfinder for others who choose to adopt your course.


Second of all, I'll have you know that my idea of hand-crafted boxed sets is for the scrap heap. I tried making one of the boxes and not too far into the project it became clear to me that this wasn't going to work as well as I had planned. I should have figured as much. It was a disaster.


That may be true. I was wondering about that. I think there's a lesson in this when it comes to decision-making as well. If you're picturing how something is going to go and it's a critical part of your program, it's a good idea to get to the prototype stage as soon as possible. As I've explained in another area of publishing, promotion, I pretty much go down the list of things that I haven't tried and try them so I can check them off and say, "Right, that didn't work." I've been doing it for so long that I've actually come to a "negative inference" conclusion: promotion doesn't work in the comic-book field. The only exception in recent years has been this, the Blog & Mail. Right, let's try it out. Create the illusion of a daily blog by doing a week's worth in one day. Try it for six months then check it off. Right, that didn't work. But it did this time. Just about at the six-month mark. The advantage to just "going ahead and doing it" (whatever it is) is that you eliminate things from your list so you are always engaged in new thinking. In this instance, if you had sat down and tried to do a prototype hand-made box a year ago or two years ago or whenever you started thinking about it you would have found out it was a disaster and you could have been thinking of other things to try for the last two years!


But before you throw the baby out with the bathwater on your boxed set idea, there are boxing companies that specialize in boxes. You can get them made just about any size and shape you want out of just about any material that you want. You can get them so they're re-sealable. You can get them with an ANUBIS decal on them. That's another big part of self-publishing. Figure out exactly what you want, go find someone who does that, describe it to them and get a cost estimate. Most artists continually have the mistaken idea that the business world is like school or your parents where everything you come up with there's a good reason why you CAN"T. Business isn't like that. Business functions on finding a way to get your money out of your pocket and into his pocket.


If you walked into a boxing company with the first 40 minis and just explained to the guy, I want to sell these as a boxed set at trade shows so I'd like to get an attractive box specially made to hold them. I probably only want a hundred boxes to start with but I'll probably need more later on and I'm looking to spend roughly a dollar a box, maybe more depending on what I can get for the extra money that will make the boxes more attractive.


Now if it was school or your parents, that's where CAN"T would come in. And they'd make you feel like an idiot into the bargain, which is why most artists would rather roll around in broken glass and iodine than go into an Actual Business and discuss Business with someone. But, the difference here is that unlike school or your parents, there is money to be made. Buddy behind the counter – particularly if he has a stake in the business -- doesn't care if you're a nerd or your glasses make you look funny. He isn't going to make fun of you because you don't know if the Angels are a baseball team or a football team. All he knows is that there's a chance for him to sell you a hundred boxes. Maybe more after that. If he doesn't sell them to you, somebody else will. He's got a lot of customers who came in looking for a hundred boxes and now order thousands every year and have for the last fifteen years and without them doing that, he couldn't pay his rent or his help.


You want a nice-looking box for your boxed set of mini-comics? I'm all ears. Tell me what you're looking for.


Then he asks you some questions most of which are going to hinge on whether he has to make the box specially or if he can sell you a standard box and just put some lamination on it or something. His job is making boxes so he knows every box-making trick there is. You maybe can't get a box that fits the books exactly, but for 3 cents a box you can maybe get an insert that will fill up the extra space. For another 1.5 cents you can get a decal made that says ANUBIS that you can stick on the insert and it looks as if you designed it that way from the beginning. And you don't have to make a decision right there. Tell him you're getting quotes from other companies and get quotes from other companies. You live in a democracy. You don't have to pay for something until you decide that it's the thing that you want. Especially if you're buying in quantity and especially if you're getting it tailor-made.


Tomorrow: What Scott's decided to do


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Monday, September 10, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #364 (September 10th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________




IT'S SCOTT "ANUBIS" BERWANGER CARRY-OVER WEEK

HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL

EXCHANGING VIEWS WITH THE AUTHOR AND ARTIST OF

ANUBIS, HIS PROPOSED 3,200 PAGE GRAPHIC NOVEL OF WHICH HE HAS COMPLETED 1,000 PAGES

YOU CAN CONTACT SCOTT IN PERSON AT

ADVENTURE COMICS, 1100 BELLEVISTA CT., SEVERNA PARK, MD, 21146



Okay, on to excerpts from Scott's two letters dated July 8.


Dear Dave,


Jesus, I'm all over the map. At this point, the best thing to say is that writing in isn't working for me so I had best go. I'm sorry for troubling you, and want to at least be able to say it was all in earnest. I'm just having a real hard time sorting out the dissemination of my work (the actual studio effort is going splendidly).


Right now, I'm asking myself why the boxed sets wouldn't be a dignified enough presentation. In answering my own query, I'm discovering that they are dignified. They're just fine. I'm just not a commercial artist of any kind. Maybe I should keep that second, shorter, graphic novel in mind for the future as well, paint along the way from time to time, too. I mean what's the point in censoring myself?


I'm so sorry for all this. I'd best sign off and return to my corner of the world.



No need to be sorry. You're just thinking out loud and that's one of the best ways to think, in my experience. I think there's more value in a self-publisher wannabe getting to read something like this than my own "decided what I was going to do when I was 23, and did it `til I was 47" case closed approach which makes everyone else just feel incompetent, unfocused and unaccomplished. Most people have a lot of doubts and change their minds frequently. And you're already one of a handful of people who have done 1,000 pages of a comic-book story anytime in human history.


I think it's a wrong way to think of it, though, to ask "what's the point in censoring myself?" That's the feminist in you. There's a big difference between censoring yourself and understanding that the years you have to work at peak efficiency are limited (your twenties and thirties, mostly) and that you have to make the most efficient use of those years. You can't do everything that you want to do. Trying to do everything you want to do is apt to make you a "multi-tasking" dilettante who never makes his mark anywhere. Be wary of framing questions in pejorative terminology like "censoring yourself". That's just going to compel a knee-jerk recoil which is the opposite of thinking it through. I can ask myself "What fun is this? Sitting at a keyboard for fourteen hours typing out my opinions for people I'll never meet or never know?" Well, that's a pejorative way of putting it that presupposes that life is supposed to be fun. I can get up right now, forget about the rest of my fasting day, go out and have a good meal, forget that I haven't had a drink in over four years and have a nice half bottle of wine and then see what there is in the way of nightlife out there and skip my evening and night prayers. That would be a lot more fun, but what would I have to show for it?


Scott's back two days later with two letters on July 8:


No. If it means that I have to sacrifice other things to self-publish a perfect-bound edition of the six-volume ANUBIS graphic novel, then that's what it means. Maybe I'll be able to hire a graphic designer to help me and maybe I won't. But it's gonna get done so long as I don't get hit by a bus or develop Parkinson's disease.


As far as painting is concerned, I think I've got that one cinched, too. What I'm really trying to do amidst all of the stink I've made over the matter is put together an exhibit of sixteen canvases in my mature style. I've already got seven of the canvases done, and if I can't get nine canvases done between now and the time ANUBIS is done, I'm just not doin' sumpthin' right. Based on my estimated time of completion, ANUBIS will be finished somewhere around my fifty-fifth birthday, sooo, that's what? A painting every two and a half or three years? I did seven canvases between 2006 and 2007 aaand met my page quotas on the graphic novel all the while. Should be a piece of cake. If I can just get those nine others done, I will have satisfied the urge to scratch the itch.


As far as the other graphic novel I was talking about doing is concerned, I really shouldn't be thinking about anything else artistically until ANUBIS is out of the starting gate and headed for the self-publishing hill. Maybe I'll get to a point where I can consider doing another graphic novel and maybe I won't. Right now all that matters is ANUBIS. And, in my view, the Anubis paintings are a part of the Anubis idea. They're something I need to work out, like the book.


Let's think of the boxed sets as my equivalent to the serialized CEREBUS or BONE or what-have'ya. Let's think in terms of figuring out a way to publish this beautiful book and keep it in the domain of Adventure Comics.



It is one of the more difficult parts of doing the comic-book magnum opus to keep yourself in the here-and-now. When it comes to "after I'm done" projects, I think it's worth reasoning that one through and going "I'm not thinking of anything else in my life in terms of `twenty or thirty years from now' why am I even pretending to picture what I'm going to want to do then, artistically?"


Speaking from experience, you aren't going to know until you've almost gotten there. It was only my decision to do an Alex Raymond/John Prentice/Al Williamson RIP KIRBY look to the Cuba sequence in FORM & VOID that told me exactly how interested I was in that. VERY interested. A lot more interested than I thought I would be. Likewise the wide-screen photorealism lifts from Fellini and Bergman in LATTER DAYS. Neither would have even occurred to me a year before that. Nor did I know that I would start reading the Bible in 1996 and what that would lead to.


You've gone back and forth so many times on the paintings, that I think you should avoid using terms like "cinched" with your present decision (whatever it happens to be at any given point).. I'd just put it in a mental box of "things to watch out for". If you're getting your quota of pages done and you're on track for your completion date, there's no reason you shouldn't do anything that interests you. It's only if that thing is getting in the way of your work or throwing you off schedule that you have to be wary of it, whatever it is.


In my case, drinking and smoking pot. I never got to the Wally Wood stage of going out and buying some beers to drink while I was drawing and then when I finished those getting myself a big dirty bottle of something and going on a multi-day toot. I always went out to a bar or a nightclub to drink and after last call I was done. We never had beer in the mini-bar fridge in the studio on King Street or upstairs here at the house. We had beer out back at Camp David for Monday night pool-playing nights with Bob and Tim but I never once went out there and cracked one open in the middle of the day or at night when I was here working by myself. If I had, even once, then that would put beer on the "things to watch out for" list. I'd smoke pot to get a nice buzz going but as the strains got more potent (I can't even imagine what they're like now) I cut down to little "one hits" off Gerhard's hooter unit. I didn't smoke until I was cross-eyed, didn't use a water pipe to get maximum smoke with minimum throat scorch.


As I say, "things to watch out for". Anything that gets in the way of your productivity should be on that list and should be watched carefully. If the paintings aren't in the way, there's nothing wrong with the paintings, if the paintings are in the way, then you have some choices to make.


In the other July 8 letter he wrote:


Only thing is that if my hunch is right about the future of the small-press book market, putting together conventionally published edition of ANUBIS might actually be a retrograde move. Reason being: the means of publication is being put into the hands of more people than ever before. And, as I see it, there will become more, and more, and more choices between titles for readers than ever before. From what I understand, web comics are spreading like wildfire, too. So, as choice increases significantly the odds of having an independent title skyrocket or to even make a significant mark will not necessarily get easier. It might even get harder. And that being as such, working with boxed sets and the immediacy of them, would be more akin to riding the current, than fighting upstream with self-publishing. That is my prediction, anyway. Sort of eerie to think about Warhol's statement that in the future "everyone will have fifteen minutes of fame" I see that as a prophecy of the times, in a way, with it having been said almost fifty years ago.


One of the Second City comedy reviews in Toronto back in the 90s was called "Andy Warhol, Your Fifteen Minutes Are Up."


You're never going to know exactly what the market is going to be like at any given point and no one knows what book is going to "skyrocket" at any given point. Usually the unexpectedness of a "skyrocket" book is a big part of the process itself. No one would have guessed that Elfquest or the Turtles or Bone would "skyrocket". The question in each case was: is there even a market for this in an environment so dominated by Marvel and DC super-heroes? Three times the answer was, YOU BETCHA. Most of the rest of the time, it's: so far, so good or, more often, no, not a chance.


Remember, I'm sitting on my own secret project at the moment – perhaps permanently -- because the domination by super-heroes is just so extreme right now. I couldn't tell you if that will improve in the next six months or the next six years, let alone twenty or thirty years from now when you're ready to bring ANUBIS to market. All you can really do is make your best guess and go for it when you think the time is right and hope you're right.


I guess what I'm trying to say is that for ANUBIS to be up for consideration amongst comic-book scholarship (my wish and dream come true), I might not need to go beyond my home-grown boxed sets to achieve that aim. If, for instance, the boxed set ever came up for consideration as a viable means of dissemination, and I was not dependent upon the perfect-bound model to "succeed" I would opt for sticking with the boxed sets. If anything, it would be A LOT less work on my part – or, at least, more the kind of what that I'm put together for; for me making the minis and the boxes is fun, fooling with computer software is not, making sales calls is not. Wouldn't have to bother with all of that digital pre-press or any of the business publishing mechanics (instinctively, I think of myself more as a printmaker than a self-publisher). Remember, I think that the boxed set is dignified enough. Question is, will everyone else? If they ever do, I'll be in a great position.


Yes, but I think you already got that whole aspect covered when you decided that your regular job was there to provide you with a livelihood, so that whatever form of dissemination you chose, your livelihood wasn't riding on it. It strikes me that that plays very much in your favour. You pick the format that you think is best suited to ANUBIS and let the chips fall where they may.


As to comic book scholarship, well, scholarship in any field is just an initial response, anyway. There are any number of authors who were the object of intense academic scrutiny in their hey-day who are completely forgotten today. Fitzgerald, to cite an example, wasn't taken seriously by the academy until long after he was dead and that was mostly through the efforts of Matthew Broccoli. If you have a Matthew Broccoli in your corner it becomes impossible to tell if you actually warrant all the attention that you're getting or if it's sustainable. The actual answer doesn't come until way, way after you and your entire generation has been long dead.


Chester and I were both at The Beguiling when Douglas Wolk's new book on comics came in. Peter handed us both a copy and told us that there was a chapter on each of us. Mine was a fleshed-out variation on Wolk's article in THE BELIEVER. I mean, in a way, it's one of those "dream come true" things – a New York Times journalist writing a chapter on my work in his book. On the other hand it was $27.50 Canadian and, like all scholarship on CEREBUS was still basically skirting around the question of whether or not Dave Sim is literally crazy because he isn't a feminist. As Peter Straub said when the original article came out, it was as if he was asking, "What if Hitler had been a brilliant painter instead of a mediocre one?" And, of course, from my side it's a matter of "How can you seriously believe in feminism after thirty-seven years of seeing what it actually is?" The two perceptions are so far apart it would have been pointless to buy a copy, bring it home and go through the chapter line by line comparing it to the original article to see if he had moved closer to my position or further away. And it was $27.50! That's a lot of money for a few pages carefully but not specifically calling you possibly, possibly not a misogynist.


Put another way, I got a very nice write-up in THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY back in the 1980s, but its not as if they've mentioned me a whole lot since then, right?


Tomorrow: Scott's two most recent letters


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Sunday, September 09, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #363 (September 9th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Sunday September 9 –


You know, just because you harbour a venomous loathing for anything having to do with organized religion and a compulsion to enunciate your views edged with the most poisonous level of sarcasm you can muster and just because you believe God is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated by mankind upon itself, doesn't mean that you aren't doing His work according to His plan.


Christopher Hitchens is a good case in point. I read all of the excerpts from his book GOD IS NOT GREAT that the National Post ran and, boy, does he have a mad on about God and boy can he lay it on with a trowel and boy do I ever disagree with him. But, just recently The NATIONAL POST also ran his Slate.com column "From Baghdad to Kabul, it's the same good fight" August 15 which is a classic of its kind, beginning with an across-the-board denunciation of what he sees as the inherent foolish sophistry of Jews, Christians (Roman Catholics and their Eastern Orthodox Brethren) and Muslims (you know, people like me) which then segues neatly into a Big However as only Christopher Hitchens can deliver them. HOWEVER…


…the believers are models of lucidity when compared to the hair-splitting secularists who cannot accept that al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia, which has staged some of Iraq's deadliest suicide bombings since 2003, is a branch of al-Qaeda itself.


There is such a smorgasbord of leftist and secularist delusional beliefs that are founded upon nothing and manufactured out of whole cloth and yet are accepted as holy writ universally on the part of leftists and secularists, I never quite know where to begin and end up just amplifying something that Victor David Hanson has written that Darrell sent me and correcting mythologies about Islam and the Koran when it comes time to write the Sunday edition. With this one, right from the opening paragraph, I was thinking "Boy was THIS long overdue." Okay secularists, here comes Christopher Hitchens, one of your own, and yes, those are very long, very sharp surgical tools that he's wielding and yes, this is apt to sting a bit.


Objections to this self-evident fact take one of two forms.


It is argued, first, that there was no such organization before the coalition intervention in Iraq. It is argued, second, that the character of the gang itself is somewhat autonomous from, and even independent of, the original group proclaimed by Osama bin Laden. These objections sometimes, but not always, amount to the suggestion that the "real" fight against al-Qaeda is, or should be, not in Iraq but in Afghanistan. (I say "not always" because many of those who argue the difference are openly hostile to the presence of NATO forces in Afghanistan as well as to the presence of coalition soldiers in Iraq.)


The facts as we have them are not at all friendly to this view of the situation, whether it be the "hard" view that al-Qaeda terrorism is a "resistance" to Western imperialism or the "soft" view that we have only created the monster in Iraq by intervening there.


The founder of al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia (AQM) was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who we can now gratefully describe as "the late". The first thing to notice about him is that he was in Iraq before we were. The second thing to notice is that he fled to Iraq only because he, and many others like him, had been driven out of Afghanistan. Thus, by the logic of those who say that Afghanistan is the "real" war, he would have been better left as he was. Without the overthrow of the Taliban, he and his collaborators would not have moved to take advantage of the next failed/rogue state. I hope you can spot the simple error of reasoning that is involved in this belief.



Um, he isn't speaking rhetorically, there, secularists. He really does hope you can spot the simple error of reasoning that is involved in this belief. Read the paragraph a few more times and see if you don't "get it" and how that undermines your core belief that al-Qaeda either isn't in Iraq or is not the real al-Qaeda.


As it happens, we also know that Zarqawi – who probably considered himself a rival to bin Laden as well as an ally – wrote from Iraq to bin Laden and to his henchman Ayman al-Zawahiri and asked for the local "franchise" to call himself the leader of AQM. This dubious honour he was duly awarded. We further know that he authored a plan for the wrecking of the new Iraq: a simple strategy to incite civil murder between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. The incredible evil of this proposal, which involved the blowing up of holy places and the assassination of pilgrims, was endorsed from whatever filthy cave these deliberations are conducted in. As a matter of fact, we even know that Zawahiri and his boss once or twice counselled Zarqawi to hold it down a bit, especially on the video-butchery and the excessive zeal in the murder of Shiites. Thus, if there is any distinction to be made between the apple and the tree, it would involve saying that AQM is, if anything, even more virulent and sadistic and nihilistic than its parent body.


And this very observation leads to a second one, which has been well-reported and observed by journalists who are highly sceptical about the invasion. In provinces like Anbar, and in areas of Baghdad, even Sunni militants have turned away in disgust and fear from the AQM forces. It's not difficult to imagine why this is: Try imagining life for a day under the village rule of such depraved and fanatical elements.


To say that the attempt to Taliban-ize Iraq would not be happening at all if coalition forces were not present is to make two unsafe assumptions and one possibly suicidal one. The first assumption is that the vultures would never have gathered to feast on the decaying cadaver of the Saddamist state, a state that was in a process of implosion well before 2003. All our experience of countries like Somalia and Sudan and indeed, of Afghanistan, argues that such an assumption is idiotic. It is in the absence of international attention that such nightmarish abnormalities flourish.



Link that thought back to the decision of Zarqawi to flee FROM Afghanistan TO Iraq when the invasion of Afghanistan by the Coalition of the Willing made Afghanistan inhospitable for his brand of extremism. Do you get it now? If you want to know what the worst environment on the planet is and the environment most amenable to the worst of the Islamists is, just look at where they run to when they can't stay where they are.


Remember George W. Bush declaring war on terrorist states and those states which harbour terrorists. Remember that brief few moments in your secularist lives when that made perfect sense? Is there some way for you to get back there or are you now in full-bore LalaLala I'm Not Listening mode again?


The second assumption is that the harder we fight them, the more such cancers metastasize. This appears to be contradicted by all the experience of Iraq. Fallujah or Baqubah might already have become the centres of an ultra-Taliban mini-state, as they at one time threatened to do, whereas now not only have thousands of AQM goons been killed but local opinion appears to have shifted decisively against them and their methods.


The third assumption, deriving from the first two, would be that if coalition forces withdrew, the AQM gangsters would lose their raison d'etre and have nothing left to fight for. I think I shall just leave that assumption lying where it belongs: on the damp floor of whatever asylum it is where foolish and wishful opinions find their eventual home.



I'm happy to leave it there, as well, but only after pointing out that wherever you have the most extreme forms of Islamism – and the AQM, like the Taliban that spawned it, is QED pretty much the most extreme form of Islamism imaginable – where you withdraw and leave them to their own devices (as Israel keeps having to learn and re-learn) what you effectively do is prove to them that God is on their side and has delivered them the victory. Far from losing their raison d'etre, retreat from them amplifies it and tilts the environment away from mainstream Islam to Islamism. RIP Yasser Arafat.


If I am right about this, an enormous prize is within our reach. We can not only deny the clones of bin Ladenism a military victory in Iraq, we can also discredit them in the process and in the eyes (and with the help) of a Muslim people who have seen them up close. We can do this, moreover, in a keystone state of the Arab world that guards a chokepoint – the Gulf – in the global economy.


Let me just interject to say that I think it is inescapable that we can accomplish this only if we don't allow the Democrats and the squishy Republicans to compel us to lose our nerve when we, of the Coalition of the Willing have lost the merest fraction of military lives that we used to lose on a daily basis in World War II. George W. Bush made it clear from the outset and in his various State of the Union addresses that the war on terror wasn't going to be won overnight, but that it was winnable and furthermore that it needed to be won. All that is required is for the new police forces in Iraq and the new national military in Iraq and most especially the people of a New Democratic Iraq to see clearly WHAT and WHO the al-Zarqawi's of the world are and to realize that if they are not destroyed now, that the window is closing on that opportunity (thanks to the Democrats and the squishy Republicans) and if they don't take a stand now for basic human decency the opportunity may not come again for several generations, if ever. This realization, too, was not going to happen overnight, but this realization, too, will inevitably happen if we just don't lose our nerve. And right now, as I have said before, the only decision-maker I see as not losing his nerve is George W. Bush.


As with the case of Afghanistan – where several provinces are currently on a knife-edge between an elected government that at least tries for schools and vaccinations, and the forces of uttermost darkness that seek to negate such things – the struggle will take all of our nerve and all our intelligence. But who can argue that it is not the same battle in both cases, and who dares to say that it is not worth fighting?


Sad to say, in the United States, "who dares to say" is shaping up to be a majority coalition of Democrats and squishy Republicans and in Canada – which is right now doing most of the military heavy lifting in those "knife-edge" areas of Afghanistan – a majority coalition of Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said he will not extend Canada's military commitment to Afghanistan beyond the January 2009 mandate without the authorization of parliament and, right now, he doesn't have the votes.


We are losing our nerve on the cusp of victory – now, I think, measured in years and not decades -- and it is so completely unnecessary.


It's ironic to me that Christopher Hitchens -- here at the highest peak of his favouritism in the eyes of secular humanists for his writings against God and organized religion -- proves to be one of the few people on the planet six years after 9/11 who is able to see clearly what is at stake and how we are actually doing.


I picture God saying, "Hitchens? Oh, sure, doesn't believe in Me for one second – can't go ten minutes without uttering some blasphemous epithet or other, but, boy – doesn't he know how to cut through the b.s. of the secular humanists when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan with those long, sharp surgical tools of his? Wish I had a hundred more like him. You GO, Christopher!"


I really don't know how this Internet thing works. I assume that Slate.com pays Hitchens a large amount of money for a piece like this which I have not only run in its entirety (what would I cut?) without permission but which I have added my own interjections into. But, it's on the Internet, right? You can just go to Slate.com and read it for free anyway. What am I missing here? Anyway, if Christopher Hitchens or Slate.com wants to sue my ass off or they want to send me the bill for whatever this would ordinarily have cost me for second or third publication rights, plus penalties, well, my address is Box 1674, Stn. C, Kitchener, ON, Canada, N2G 4R2

___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________

If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Saturday, September 08, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #362 (September 8th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________




IT'S SCOTT "ANUBIS" BERWANGER WEEK

HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL

FOLKS INTERESTED IN PURCHASING THE AVAILABLE PARTS OF THE ANUBIS GRAPHIC NOVEL PROJECT (PROJECTED TO RUN 3,200 PAGES AND PRESENTLY AT THE 1,000 PAGE MARK) CAN CONTACT SCOTT DIRECTLY AT

ADVENTURE COMICS 1100 BELLEVISTA COURT, SEVERNA PARK, MD 21146



EXCERPTS FROM THE INDEPENDENCE DAY LETTER


Independence Day, and I'm writing in to say that I might be climbing back on board the self-publishing bandwagon. Amidst all of the vacillations I've been going through over the course of the past eight months or so, I'm starting to feel a little like Hamlet. "To paint or not to paint. That is the question." And what with the apprehensions I've had over self-publishing and all, I realize it's been quite enough…I still like that approach. I've just been trying on a different model for size (the boxed sets) and it's taken me a while to identify its various flaws.


I just look at all those perfect-bound books on my private library shelf and think to myself, "Anubis deserves to be among them. It deserves a dignified presentation." One of the biggest apprehensions I had while shying away from self-publishing in favor of being a mini-comics kid was the notion that I didn't want to chase down fame. And I am still of that temperament. But I am also realizing that, not only is fame relative, there is a big difference between being a movie star or a politician and being a self-publisher. Self-publishing ANUBIS will not likely elicit a "famous" outcome in the conventional sense. I'd like for ANUBIS to possibly belong to a certain kind of comics scholarship. For it to be an obscure masterpiece, for it to have a better chance of being preserved. Not that I want to be immortalized so much as I want for it to have a healthy life span of its own. As a mini-comic, its life will have expired the day that I staple up the last issue, or at least soon thereafter.


As far as digital pre-press is concerned, I think what I need to do is bite the bullet and grow up. Be more accountable for my affairs. Maybe my best strategy would be to decide for ANUBIS to be my only foray into comics, that I can be contented that a 3,200 page story constitutes a sufficient career span, that I can retire from comics after that, and paint in oils well into my autumn years. To be an artist unto my dying day, that is my dream, my American Dream. I think my fantasies about doing another graphic novel after ANUBIS is done have been coloring my approach to the book itself, are a trace of immaturity, and that they need to be eradicated. I'm not living in the moment as I should be, I'm trying to think past the horizon and that's not necessarily the best tack. I need to concentrate more on the task at hand.


It's Independence Day today. A good day to resume the self-publishing track. A good day to say that I am proud to be an American, proud to be a self-publisher, proud to uphold the American Dream.



I like what you have to say here about needing to "bite the bullet and grow up" when it comes to pre-press. I wondered about that when you talked about buying a photocopier to produce the digest sized comics and then make boxed sets out of them. Is that REALLY what you think best serves the book? Or are you letting ignorance of the printing process convince you that you don't want to "go there"? This is one of those things that you always have to be aware of when you are a one-man operation. There can be many parts to the job that you don't like and you'd rather not do, but there should never be any part that you're afraid to do. And if there is, your best bet is to tackle whatever it is that you're afraid of head-on and show yourself that there's nothing to be afraid of.


One of the tough ones there is not being afraid, but having an aversion to something. I certainly had an aversion to the idea of doing the bank reconciliation every month when Gerhard quit. Basically, a bank reconciliation is the same as balancing your chequebook, only doing it for a company instead. I basically decided to get a bookkeeping service. Now, on the one hand, there is a good argument to be made for learning how to do a bank rec and doing it as a form of self-discipline. At the same time, in a one-man operation there are better uses for my time. You always have to remind yourself that you make your money from writing and drawing things that only you can write and draw. The Yellow Pages are full of people who can do a bank reconciliation for a fee.


I open all the bills and I write all the cheques and I closely monitor the bank balance on the company savings account and chequing account and I have a pretty good idea when a cheque is due from Diamond Comics and how much it's going to be for. But, there's always going to be a balancing act between hands-on control of all the business aspects and deciding which business aspects can be "farmed out" so that I have time to do the Blog & Mail which promotes the trade paperbacks and to write and draw new material for possible future publication and commissions for immediate cash to help the ol' cash flow.


And there are degrees of fame. In self-publishing, Image Comics, Richard & Wendy Pini and Jeff Smith and Vijaya Ayer have come the closest to actual Fame but you really need a Mega-Hit movie like Kevin and Peter had to break through to the next level. And even then it tends to be a temporary spike that you have to accommodate rather than a new way of living you have to get used to. But even the limited level of comic-book fame of myself or Terry Moore or folks like that is something that you arguably should be wary of. There you are as famous as each individual reader considers you to be so everything you do and say is magnified. When you publish ANUBIS, you may have only a few thousand readers but there are problem children in any group of a few thousand people and they are your problem in a real sense because YOU are the element THEY have in common. When you are pretty much non-existent in your actual real-world life, having that kind of `public figure' responsibility (and it is a responsibility) strikes a surreal note that never actually goes away. It is always there. You're a complete non-entity but you still have to learn how to be a good famous person for the people for whom you are famous. I can certainly understand wanting to avoid that and postpone it as long as possible. It sounds like about as much fun as it is.


Coming Monday: Scott's July 6 letter

Tomorrow: Christopher Hitchens, Agent of God!


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Friday, September 07, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #361 (September 7th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________




IT'S SCOTT "ANUBIS" BERWANGER WEEK

HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL

FOLKS INTERESTED IN PURCHASING AVAILABLE PARTS OF THE ANUBIS GRAPHIC NOVEL PROJECT (PROJECTED FOR 3,200 PAGES AND PRESENTLY AT PAGE 1,000) CAN CONTACT SCOTT DIRECTLY AT

ADVENTURE COMICS, 1100 BELLEVISTA CT. SEVERNA PARK, MD. 21146



A few more thoughts on Scott's manifesto from Wednesday and Thursday of this week:


I know you don't really have an enormous background in comic books. It's more of a medium that selected you rather than anything that you grew up in. So it was interesting reading your thoughts on the nature of the craftsman since I imagine you are unaware of the big dust-up over the term `craft' (as opposed to Art) that took place back in the 1980s and 1990s when Gary Groth, through his magazine, THE COMICS JOURNAL effectively turned it into a pejorative. Not only a pejorative, but the worst pejorative imaginable. You wouldn't want to be caught dead defining your comic-book work as a `craft' because you would as much as be admitting that you were a fourth-rate talent, a hack. Hacks were craftsmen and craftsmen were hacks and Gary would brook no denial.


I always thought it was the weirdest discussion I had ever read. Of course there is craft attached to comic book creation. Do you think Gilbert Hernandez developed the facility to do a consistent style over however many hundred of pages PALOMAR turned out to be by sitting down at the drawing board only when he was in the white-hot throes of True Artistic Inspiration and then slashing away at the page in a fury of passion? Just the fact that someone pencils a comic book page before they ink it puts it into the category of craft.


There are certainly Artistes in the comic-book field and (not surprisingly) THE COMICS JOURNAL is the only magazine to document them. There is absolutely no craft to their work whatsoever (very funny to write that, since I can't think of a worse thing to say about another artist's work even as I know that they would view it as the highest possible accolade). It is pure Inspired Art. But, to me, all that means is that they have run their cars into the same artistic cul de sac as Picasso, Warhol and Jackson Pollock. I think Gary can take full credit for that since I don't know of anyone else who was more assiduous in his advocacy of bringing that category of creation into the comic-book field and automatically deifying it. The unspoken competition is on: who can produce the comic book with the LEAST amount of craft to it? Who can produce the most excrescent comic-book equivalent of a Jackson Pollock painting? I don't know who it will end up being, but I'll be flipping past them just as I flip past all of the contenders for the pantheon on the COMICS JOURNAL's Mount Olympus.


Ivan Brunetti is a good example of why I think that Gary's theory of craft-free infantilism being the ne plus ultra of comic art is full of holes. The Cerebus Archive contains Ivan's first two incarnations of MISERY LOVES COMEDY that he sent me back when he was in high school? College? They're very funny (VERY funny – I never forgot the name) but they have not an ounce of craft to the drawing or lettering. Now Ivan is one of the most accomplished artists at Fantagraphics in terms of finish and execution – that is craft – probably second only to Chris Ware in terms of pure craft exhibited on every page. But, presumably, his hack-and-slash infantile style of his high school years is the more Artistic for that reason. No craft=Art.


Silly-ass theory, if you ask me, but don't let me stop you, Gar.


Okay, let's talk about something interesting instead. A few days after having consolidated his three letters into a kind of manifesto, Scott was already having second thoughts and sent along another letter:


Dear Dave,


Or you could argue that by taking up painting again, I'm simply overextending myself and living beyond my means. The graphic novel is something that needs to happen, but is painting? Painting takes up a lot of living space; I could move to a smaller place to save money and concentrate wholly on the ANUBIS graphic novel. Not worry about painting, and still be able to call myself a craftsman. That's what should be the most important to me. No need to be the grandstanding artist. I don't need to prove to the world who I am. I don't need to prove that to anyone. Not even my readers. I am there for them as a curiosity; whether they take my work seriously, or think me a fool, is up to them.


To the death,


Scott.



Well, yes. I have to admit that it's a compelling enough subject as you've been discussing it in the depth that you have in your letters that I've gone from being completely dispassionate about it to wondering if it's something that I want to try. Now that I'm actually working again. That's pretty compelling considering that I haven't done an actual painting in over thirty years.


I think a lot of it comes down to motivation and dividing your resources. But, on a purely theoretical level, I picture doing, say, a canvas of the "baby-throwing page" from Church & State. Enlarging the wind-up and the pitch to, say, two feet by three feet. Now, there's an appeal to that, particularly doing the tone on Cerebus by hand. I think that's one of the things that you understood viscerally when you came up with it. It's a black-and-white painting. That's pretty odd and innovative right there. The average painter could maybe conceive of doing a black and white painting as a one-off change of pace, but what painter would say "All my paintings will be black and white only"? And, in my case there's the commercial consideration. Here is the only painting of the baby-throwing page. What am I bid? You can call that crass commercialism but, to me, there are too many other elements that go into it. What better image to distil the essence of Cerebus the Pope? It says a lot, even if you (and perhaps ESPECIALLY if you) don't know anything about the book.


But, of course, I'm working on Secret Project II now and I want to get back to it. Between writing these Blog & Mail entries and TCAF this weekend it will be more than a week before I can do so. Anything else that I decide to do is going to be in the way of that. As you say, am I comic-book artist or am I a painter? Arguably being able to produce attractive work at an unnaturally fast pace (when compared to most art forms) is a core element of being able to say "I am a comic-book artist" as opposed to "I drew a comic book once." Craft, again. The same as the difference between someone who designs and builds one-of-a-kind bookshelves adorned with intricate carvings and sells them and someone who once designed and built a one-of-a-kind bookshelf strictly for himself and never did again. If you're selling them, in order to make the expenditure of time worthwhile, you have to develop craft, facility, short-cuts, aptitudes. If you're doing it for yourself you can take as long as you like and do everything the most difficult way possible and never once think "There's got to be an easier way to do this."


But, it's an individual call. I think in your own case, the fact that you paint and then think better of it and then paint again and then think better of it means that it will always be a part of ANUBIS (unless you just decide to burn all the paintings one night and never do another one) as a creative work in toto. It's a graphic novel and it's a certain number of paintings. You're pretty sure it's a 3,200 page graphic novel but you have no idea how many paintings it might prove to be.


In his letter of June 29, Scott writes


So, in retrospect, do I think that I made a mistake by barging into your PO Box as I have? Depends upon how you look at it, actually. If you ask why I would want to be linked in any way to the person responsible for the CEREBUS pantheon of political and/or religious perspectives, well then yes: it was a mistake. But if you consider how I may have inadvertently drafted a road map for aspiring creators (as you say) wanting to pursue their very own mammoth, self-made comic-book story, or how I was able to vent my frustrations along the way to artistic maturity by penning missives to an established professional – the only one (I might add) who would listen – well, then, no. It wasn't a mistake. From my point of view, privately, it's really not a problem. I definitely think that I've overdone it, but whether or not I have worn out my welcome is for you to determine (not me), being on the far end of it. The fact that you do not likely think of me as an annoyance is one of the things that leads me to consider you a friend. You've been good to me, but I don't think of this as a public channel. Whatever comes out of my efforts here is not something I want to cultivate further than I already have by writing it down and mailing it. I'd venture to say that most of this stuff won't be part of the ANUBIS catalogue.


Well, yes, Association With Dave Sim: Asset or Folly? isn't something that's going to get established in the short term, I don't think and I can certainly understand people being wary of it or ambivalent about it (asking me to write an introduction for their book and then not mentioning it on the cover comes to mind). I'd be lying if I said I'd rather see another letter from Scott Berwanger in the mailbox than a $10,000 cheque from Diamond but that doesn't mean you've overstayed your welcome. Even though it seems to accumulate in a hurry and I never seem to get to the bottom of it, I don't think of myself as being inundated with mail. If you can open all of your mail and read it in less than an hour (including the magazines and comic books) then your mail is still in the manageable category.


I don't think of you as a friend. I think we have a mutual loyalty which is to the comic-book/graphic novel medium. You're attempting something that hasn't been attempted before and which could (or could not) prove to be a more viable template for the aspiring magnum opus graphic novelist than anything I did. I think I'm well-positioned because of my own loyalty to and status within the comic book/graphic novel medium context to preserve whatever amount of your own thinking you want to send my way and I'll try and run as much of it as I can on the Blog & Mail and preserve all of it in the Cerebus Archive. To me that has very little – in fact, virtually nothing – to do with either of us as people. If you want to send me the life history of your mother, as an example, I'll be happy to read it and preserve it but I don't think it's going to be of much use to anyone either now or a hundred years from now in deciding whether or not or how they intend to do their own graphic novel.


Things like this from further on in your June 29 letter:


No plans to buy my own photocopier now. The main drawback I see with doing that would be maintenance. Photocopiers break down rather frequently, and can be cantankerous beasts when they want to. I'll let the folks at Office Depot bear the burden of keeping them running. No interest in doing a web comic. In my mind, comics will always belong on paper, not presented with electronic media. I am determined to keep my comics on paper.


It's just as likely as not that five years from now (let alone a hundred years from now) you'll need a footnote on that to explain what a photocopier was because everyone will have a printer that does what photocopiers used to do. But, in the context of our present time, I think you've made the right choice. Someday when I get caught up on everything, I'd like to do a mini-comic or a digest on the photocopier I have – just ten or twenty copies of something but I sure wouldn't want to try producing an actual print-run of something on it. Most of the problem is the toner which produces great jet black copies but soon erodes into really dark gray.


Tomorrow: The Independence Day letter


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Thursday, September 06, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #360 (September 6th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________




IT’S SCOTT “ANUBIS” BERWANGER WEEK
HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL
PEOPLE INTERESTED IN PURCHASING AVAILABLE PARTS OF THE ANUBIS GRAPHIC NOVEL PROJECT (PROJECTED FOR 3,200 PAGES AND PRESENTLY AT PAGE 1,000) CAN CONTACT SCOTT AT
ADVENTURE COMICS, 1100 BELLEVISTA CT. SEVERNA PARK, MD. 21146

SCOTT BERWANGER ON:
THE ANUBIS GRAPHIC NOVEL & THE ANUBIS PAINTINGS

Part Two: What a craftsman is not


A craftsman is not a showman.
A craftsman is not shameless.
A craftsman is not a philosopher.
A craftsman is not a leader.
A craftsman is not well known.
A craftsman is not an apostate.

So, it’s these kinds of notions that really separate what I am doing with Anubis and what the Pop artists of the mid-to-late 1900s were doing with their own approach to art making.

Maybe I’m a craftsman with a certain sense of adventure…as it relates to the telling of tales, or a fondness for boyhood conquests, but I don’t want to make many suppositions beyond that. For me – and this applies equally to the hand-stitched Anubis mini-comics in their own right …


[Sorry to interrupt Scott in mid-thought: there’s some dispute in the field as to what to call comic books made from 8.5 x 11” sheets folded in half. Although they are more widely described as “mini-comics” by people in the mainstream – who tend to categorize any photocopied black-and-white comic book with or without a colour cover as a mini-comic -- most mini-comics practitioners hold that mini-comics are comic books made from 8.5. x 11” sheets folded in quarters and then trimmed. Also called “8-pagers” because you get 8 pages from a single 8.5 x 11 sheet. Comic books made from 8.5 x 11 sheets folded in half are usually called “digests” by mini-comics practitioners. To further complicate matters, back in the 1990s self-published promotional excerpts from forthcoming full-sized comics (usually signed and numbered and given away or sold at conventions) came to be called “ashcans” after the use of the same format in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s when it was used to establish and register proprietorship of a comic book title. The new logo would be slapped onto a hastily assembled package of pages from a publisher’s previously published inventory of work and registered as a trademark and copyright as well as being offered for sale on a handful of newsstands.

The Anubis mini-comics – distinct from the original run of full-sized comic books with black and white interiors and colour covers -- are in this digest format, 8.5 x 11 sheets folded in half and sport colour photocopy covers. Courtesy of Scott, The Cerebus Archive presently houses issues 1 through 32 of this series]

…craftsmanship is the measure and means of my artistic activity. Or more accurately, at least it should be.

When it comes to actual storytelling, I want to take a craftsman’s angle as well. To tell a well-crafted story with very little else in terms of excess intellectual or symbolic baggage is what doing Anubis should be all about – a nice big bite of rollicking adventure, free from controversy or innuendo. I suppose there is some latent content that belies my reluctance to admit certain themes and symbols, but it is auxiliary, or perhaps incidental, in my view. Or to put it another way, it is a talent that may well come out from the subconscious, as opposed to the conscious.

I mean, mood sure is nice if utilized properly…

But seriously, craftsmanship is also more important to me than exposure. Once again, setting me apart from someone like Warhol who lusted after fame, and wished it almost equally for everyone else around him. He wanted to bring forth a subculture, I guess.

Well, yes. While I will concede exposure is a factor amidst my own intentions relating to Anubis, I still think that I can get the needed amount of attention from East Coast small-press trade shows for my mini-comics, and a smattering of unobtrusive, low-key gallery showings for my canvases. So, I don’t have any solid plans for putting together an actual painting exhibition yet. For now, I want to just concentrate on the studio time. I’ve got 30-35 pages to go on Book I to be done in time for SPX ’07, and I also need to figure out how to make the boxes. Once I’m past that, and in between Books I and II of Anubis, I can devote some time to painting.

But what about the idea? Why all of this emphasis on craftsmanship? What about the comic book functioning as an idea, an intellectual property? Isn’t that something that goes beyond mere craftsmanship? The “idea” is me, reflecting on my life, my place in the world. And it requires the amassing of resources like photo references, latent mental images, or remembered passages from storybooks or old movies. Or maybe it’s constituted of an already-present archetypal mythos embedded in my consciousness – a storyteller’s instinct or maybe his conditioning

(Whether the mythos was implanted by someone else during my formative years or whether it was cultivated by me, along the way, is something to reflect upon. But, really, the archetypes are either there or they aren’t. I can’t do anything to change that from this point in time. As it relates to me, or at least to Anubis, the die has already been cast. Now, it’s mostly just a matter of showing up for work in the morning).


[Hate to interrupt again, but I have to say that that parenthetical aside is my favourite thing of Scott’s that he’s written here. If you have everything ordered in your book, it is, indeed, “mostly just a matter of showing up for work in the morning”.]

So putting it all together is going to be an act of craftsmanship, ehh? Yeah. And while the “idea” may be tangential to that, it will mostly be a matter of making it actual, as a fine woodworker would make a bench or an oaken table with hand tools, based on a blueprint or schematic. The idea is the blueprint. But the furniture is what has the actual function. Once the bench or the table has been crafted, the blueprint is of much less use. It may serve as a curiosity of sorts, as my sketchbook samples in the back section of the serialized comic books do, but it isn’t intended to be an inseparable part of the formal presentation. And that’s one of the reasons why I like to paint, too. Painting is verrry formal. In the end result, there is little there that is superfluous – and that is meant to include trumped-up bravado.

My ideas are in the service of the story or the painting, and once the ink or the paint has had a chance to settle, whatever conceptual aspects surrounding the artworks exist, are inherent in the physicality of the work itself. There is really no good reason to read more into it than what is in front of you once the media have coalesced. And with that being the case, I can get on with the business of the next page or the next episode. I will try not to long for something, or crave it to be permanent…consequently cleaving a rift between what a work is, and what one would reasonably refer to as a “fetish object” more than anything else. I think that Warhol had the presence of mind to distinguish between the two as well, and that everyone after him who ever had something vital to say, artistically, and who said it with any real grace, did so and does so, as well. Even if they are not widely known.

It’s one of the reasons that I want to be remembered in my time as a craftsman. Because I can see through the veneer of absurdity. Because I know better than some, and yet…maybe not as well as others, my place in the cosmos. The craftsman makes few assumptions, and in being as such does not require that he function as the grandstanding artist.

Dave –

Hope this finds you well. Thanks for all the encouragement and attention. It is much appreciated. I’ll let’cha go now…

S.


Oh, hey. No problem. Since this is my blog, I thought I’d throw my two cents in on a few of the subjects you raise before moving on to your subsequent letters. I think all of us in the comic book field think a fair amount about Lichtenstein, Warhol and Johns which, to me, is a testimony to what they actually accomplished (however inadvertently – and I’m pretty sure it was mostly inadvertent) on behalf of comics. I think the Jackson Pollock crowd had (as I think was their intention) left art no place to go after the downward trajectory of art from Picasso through to Pollock. How much more eroded could you get and still call it art? I think the actual point of the Pop Art Movement was to create an ancillary dead end: You can take genuinely bad art and call it high art. In the same sense that Picasso retreated into complete primitivism: You do art at the level of sophistication of an ignorant savage and call it high art. In the same sense that Pollock retreated into poo-poo ca-ca: You basically take a giant dump on the canvas as if your tubes of paint were so many recta and the paint fecal in nature. Pop art asked, What is the worst art in our society? And then put that on canvas. A Campbell Soup can. There. That’s bad art. A panel from a comic strip. There, that’s bad art.

Warhol trafficked in that but, as I think we would agree, his actual motivation was wealth and fame. He came up with an identifiable look, a style that was distinctively Warhol and then basically got everyone else to do the actual work when he could afford to do so and arrived at one of the Grand Summits of one way of looking at art: what form of art can I come up with that takes virtually no talent or attention to accomplish, where others can do all the hard work and I can spend my life partying and meeting famous people? There is no one higher than Warhol on that particular Summit (or, as I think you and I would agree, “summit”). Really famous people sought him out to pay him enormous sums of money to do basically the same picture of them that he did of everyone else.

I liked your point about your own paintings being self-referential. Apart from his self-portraits, nothing I can see in Warhol’s work was about Warhol (except in the sense that he was interested in fame and money and nothing else). As you say, Anubis is yours. You aren’t doing paintings of Mickey Mouse or Superman, you’re doing paintings adapted from your own comic panels. And you’ve been working in intentional isolation and obscurity for over a decade. To me those are definite Art bona fides.

As the Blog & Mail readers will see, your primary ambiguity centers on what best serves the purposes of your work, what makes Anubis either MORE Anubis-like or LESS Anubis-like. You don’t take a poll of your friends and family (or me) to find out which is which. You know that you are not only the final arbiter, but the only arbiter of what Anubis is and isn’t. What you want it to be and don’t want it to be.

Tomorrow: A few more thoughts before moving forward


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Wednesday, September 05, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #359 (September 5th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________




IT'S SCOTT "ANUBIS" BERWANGER WEEK

HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL

THOSE INTERESTED IN PURCHASING AVAILABLE PARTS OF THE ON-GOING "ANUBIS" GRAPHIC NOVEL (PROJECTED TO BE 3,200 PAGES LONG AND NOW CLOSE TO THE 1,000 PAGE MARK) CAN CONTACT SCOTT AT:

ADVENTURE COMICS, 1100 BELLEVISTA COURT, SEVERNA PARK, MD, 21146



SCOTT BERWANGER ON:

THE ANUBIS GRAPHIC NOVEL & THE ANUBIS PAINTINGS



Comics-based imagery first made its way into the Western World of painting and high- art during the 1950s, here in America, with the Pop Art Movement, which was ignited by a highly successful then-commercial artist named Andy Warhol. Although already successful as an illustrator, Warhol wasn't satisfied with his station as a commercial artist, feared being replaced by photographers in years to come, and wanted to be considered a "serious" artist more than anything else. Now, that would have been a much more difficult dream to realize if it hadn't been for the rise of Abstract Expressionism in New York; the earliest breed of post-war American painting, or "The New York School" as it had come to be known.


But, by the time Warhol, Lichtenstein, and Johns – the Pop Artists – took the floor, in the 1950s and beyond, they were debunking the perceptibly elitist aura of the high art realm (that created by the Abstract Expressionists) by inoculating it with a potent dose of perceptibly crass commercialism. My earliest impressions of what was going on with Pop Art in America during that time was that it was an elaborate satire of the bustling scene, an intention to expose its vanity, or to give it a jolt of electroshock therapy. From that perspective, I saw The Pop Artists as not necessarily wanting to glorify the images borrowed from popular and commercial culture, so much as they wanted to lay a stake to the claim of stardom for themselves, tear down established modes, and start from the ground up all over again, ridiculous as it may have seemed. I saw it as a cool-headed look at the power that loaded images had, to tear down, as well as to build up. From that point of view, Warhol's silk-screened painting of Dick Tracy wasn't necessarily intended to intone that Dick Tracy was an iconic ideal so much as he was throwing mud in the face of the wine sippers by importing loaded imagery with perceptibly crass origins, and calling it art with a capital "A".


Or was it?


By looking into it a little deeper, I discovered for myself that Warhol's wasn't a sarcastic, cynical or scathing wit. He was essentially an optimist. So why was he doing this? Placing perceivably banal, and commonplace imagery, mechanically reproduced with silk screens, with little or no further manipulation of the source material by the artist, in front of gallery audiences?


I think what happened was that a somewhat peculiar or awkward individual – an eccentric, if you will – who would not shrink back from making his dream of becoming a real artist a reality, rose to prominence. And when everyone ate it up, well…Warhol became a superstar. Warhol was the commodity, then.


As much as it may seem otherwise (and I fully realize that someone who hasn't seen my paintings might have to resort to using some imagination in digesting this commentary) that is not really what I am doing with my self-referential, comics-oriented paintings.


And I do not consider myself a "Pop" artist at all. Anyway, to do it now, in light of current trends and developments since the fifties and sixties, would be a useless endeavor. So, instead of making play over the ironies that bridge the fine-art realm with the commercial-slash-advertising-based art world (barriers that have just about as much efficacy today as the Berlin Wall), I am systematically re-contextualizing my own personal repertoire of comic-book art and iconography for consideration among the fine-art realm: re-contextualizing personal imagery into a more formal mode. But, it is crucial to note that, by default, by doing things this way (self-referentially) I must be a comic-book artist first, a painter second. Really, it is lending a sense of salvation to my original comic-book artist's identity, amidst my other dabblings: that the paintings aren't possible without the comic books to which they refer. I am exalting the Anubis imagery, with the paintings. I am calling it high art. I am reaching for the stars with my own earnings. Warhol was a borrower and an appropriationist. And while I have tried on appropriation for size upon occasion, and with painting, what I am doing with my mature style (I feel confident in having the black & white paintings considered signature works) is much more personal than that. I would go so far as to say, more private as well. It is much more a matter of craftsmanship over concept, which I will get into momentarily.


And in hand-transferring blow-ups of the Anubis xeroxography onto canvas, I have – as a matter of consequence, or if you would prefer, scientific discovery – come to compare it with a kind of calligraphy (vis-à-vis the black-and-white un-modulated acrylic paints as gross enlargements). Think of the calligrapher and his relationship to the craftsman. It is not entirely an unfathomable relation. Functional, not only for show, telling a tale of some kind…it would not be altogether unlike Chinese writing to make those kinds of paintings, I thought to myself some time ago. Albeit somewhat more complex, they would still be within that same frame of reference (and this says something about the fusion of words and pictures, beyond just words and pictures, too). This is what I see happening when I blow up panel fragments of the Anubis interior artwork something like 400% on a photocopier, and then make it six times bigger than even that by transferring it to a large canvas. The paintings have a certain sort of "thing-ness" about themselves, too which I find important to point out. It's quite a fine effect…


…but this is not what I would call Pop Art. Not the way I do it; not with my intentions.


In remaining true to my purpose, as a painter, I am considering myself primarily a craftsman (which, in part, distinguishes me from the Pop Artists' generation). As the entire process is being done by hand (as opposed to using silk screens) the modus operandi only reinforces the notion. Maybe I am more of a craftsman than I am even an artist – food for thought, at least. But my work's a brand apart in the sense that, unlike the flamboyant and unapologetic nature of the Pop artists – Warhol specifically – mine is a more quiet and introspective voice. I am more of a brooding, slow but deep, thinking soul. My mind is like a slow-cooking cauldron brew. I'm more of a craftsman, I would say. And there is some psychological weight that comes with that kind of a statement. What is a craftsman? Maybe we would be better off figuring that out by asking ourselves what a craftsman is not.


Tomorrow: What a craftsman is not


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #358 (September 4th, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

Dave Sim on Scott Berwanger on feminism:

Sandeep said an interesting thing a while back, having spent a lot of time with his family at his sister's wedding: that his whole generation is mostly divorced or single, many of them on their second marriages while the older generation is all still married to the same people they were married to years ago. It's a universal condition, I think. He also noticed that the wives of his generation pretty much mouth off to their husbands whenever they want and that that's pretty much unheard of in the older generation. "You didn't mention that, did you?" I asked. "Are you kidding," he said. "And get blamed for ruining my sister's wedding?"

I think that establishes it pretty neatly. If you just said the self-evident truth, you would ruin your sister's wedding. If your society is structured in such a way that speaking the truth would ruin a wedding, then I think your society has taken a wrong turn.

I also had to smile at Scott's "And no, I'm not a homosexual." This seems to point toward a core self-evident truth, as well. A lot of guys begin dating and get married to prove to friends and family that they aren't gay. Which is awfully convenient from the standpoint of marriage-hungry women, if you think of it. Play on heterosexual men's natural homophobia by making non-marriage evidence of homosexuality. I think it's another example of where that was a minor but universal chord in the reality of civilization you tended to have marriage as a universal condition. Everyone got married. Those who didn't were suspect. It would never occur to the average guy that he was getting married to prove he wasn't gay (even though that may have been one of the universal reasons that a lot of guys got married). Bringing that out into the open – like the malignant feminists who, after issue 186, started asking pointed questions about the relationship between Gerhard and myself so as to avoid actually discussing the flimsy foundations of feminism – I think marriage-hungry women thought would just magnify the effect. With homosexuality now an open society reality, heterosexual men would be stampeding to the altar to prove their heterosexuality. But, of course, with that came the revelation that many ostensibly happily married men are actually closeted gays. And there the marriage-hungry women out-foxed themselves. Why get married to prove you aren't gay when that no longer proves that you aren't gay? And of course now that gay marriage is legal in Canada, they're further hoist to their petard in that marriage itself is now looking more like a female/gay institution than anything that a heterosexual guy would be interested in.

Once that onion starts to unpeel, it doesn't stop. As we can see from Scott's explanation of his choice not to marry, more guys are beginning to understand that the institution itself is structurally unsound. If you're a woman and you get married and it doesn't work out, you walk away with the kids, the house, half the guy's money and half of his future income. If you're a guy and you get married and it doesn't work out, you lose your wife, your kids, your house, half of your material possessions and half of your future income.

That seems like an awful risk to take just to go through with a ceremony that isn't even going to prove to anyone that you aren't gay. It's hard to see what the upside is. If your answer is "getting laid regularly" you really need to have a long honest talk with some husbands that you know.

Got a phone call from Jeet Heer asking if I'd be on a panel with him and Ron Holmes, the late Rand Holmes' brother at TCAF on Saturday. I'd actually like to. I still have my copy of the tabloid sized COLLECTED ADVENTURES OF HAROLD HEDD that came out way back in the 70's. Holmes was really Canada's pre-eminent underground cartoonist, doing the strip for The Georgia Straight, Vancouver's original underground newspaper for a number of years. You remember my theory that Rich Corben's wizardry with the airbrush was what scared just about every other comic artist away from even trying the airbrush? I think Rand Holmes had a lot the same effect on most would-be Canadian underground cartoonists because he had such an accomplished drawing and inking style. He was crazy about Wally Wood's finish and worked obviously very, very hard to develop a comparable finish and then applied it to his underground comix work. One of the very few guys to do so. Robert Crumb and Spain and the other original underground guys all acknowledged a debt to Kurtzman's original MAD comics but all of them made the not un-sensible choice to adopt a cartooning style closer to Kurtzman rather than to Wood because it was a lot easier to do. Just keeping your brushes sharp enough and your hand steady enough to "feather" all of the hair and folds in clothing properly would be enough to make the average cartoonist swear off of the attempt after a panel or two. Obviously Rand Holmes didn't do that and all of us who saw his work back in the early 70's tended to think, "Well, okay, the Absolute Top has been reached in Canadian underground comix by this guy, so what am I going to do for a career?"

Then Jeet brought up my suggestion from a while back here in the Blog & Mail that if he was interested in assembling a book of my collected writings on comic books, I'd be happy to look at it, possibly annotate it and possibly publish it. I really thought he'd rather work on projects at his own end of the comic-book spectrum (Harold Gray with Jeet's LITTLE ORPHAN ANNIE book and Frank King with his GASOLINE ALLEY books for Drawn and Quarterly). Well, it turns out he's interested in putting such a book together but right now, like most of us, his plate is full. So I asked him what sort of a time frame we were looking at and he figured it would be another year and a half before he would be caught up on everything he's committed to and could even start on it. I suspect that will work well with my present program of completing a series of Secret Projects until I find one that I think would be appropriate to today's comic book stores with their almost exclusive emphasis on Marvel and DC super-heroes. We'll see how it goes.



Anyway, back to Scott Berwanger and a rather extensive summing up of his personal and professional philosophies from June of this year while he was working on issue 40 of ANUBIS.

Dave,

Here's a bit I put together after sending my last note. I had intended to use it as supplementary material for the ANUBIS mini-periodical, but in the end decided not to use it. Thought it could serve a purpose of some kind, so I'm resending my thoughts

From my Notes 6-11-07

The following notes are a reworking of a series of three letters [dated June 8, June 9, June 10 and included here in the Cerebus Archive 15 Aug 07] sent to Mr. Dave Sim of Aardvark-Vanaheim, Inc., penned over the course of the previous week. As I saw there were flaws in my original manuscript, I have decided to make them more accurate by way of a quick edit, while at the same time addressing them to a more general audience.

What it all boiled down to for me, over the course of the several evenings of writing letters, was a recitation of my sense of purpose as an artist, from the broadest viewpoint possible. That is, at this stage in the game. Which I can say, with a degree of confidence, is relatively advanced.

It is also a mission statement, as it relates to the rather taught relationship between ANUBIS proper – that is, the graphic novel – and my interests in painting. Actually, it's all fusing together quite nicely, and I am more or less satisfied with the progress.

I'd like to start from the perspective of what it is to make the Anubis paintings and how they figure into the spectrum of what we may now laughingly refer to as the art world…


Tomorrow: Beginning at the beginning


___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Monday, September 03, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #357 (September 3rd, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________

A couple of Darrell Epp's poems.

Baby Don't Fall


everyone was screaming about

`global warming' as if they'd

never seen snow melt before;


dorothee balanced herself on

the edge of the fire escape. i

held my breath, she laughed


at me, dorothee's not the first

alien who's asked me `what

are you people so afraid of?'




The Greyhound


our sixth winter nears but

all i can show for it is the

occasional `sounds good'

or `not bad'. i had hoped

for more, something tree-

shaped, pointing up into

the future – but

i can't see in or out you

put black tape over the

windows and before our

visitors arrive you turn

me into a hound baying

in the backyard the rope

that chokes me is tethered

securely to what i can't tell.


Michael Ragiel writes June 4:

Dear Dave,

It's hard to follow Cerebus when FOLLOWING CEREBUS hasn't come out in quite a while. Any clue as to when issue 10 will come out?

One of your faithful,

Michael Ragiel


There are some advantages to a more than two-month time delay in answering the mail and here's one of them. FOLLOWING CEREBUS 10 came out last month.

Hit a Scott Berwanger letter and thought, just out of curiosity, how many of these do I have in the to-be-answered pile? So I decided to dig down and pull them all out. Roughly, there's fourteen of them here and the to-be-answered pile is now a lot shorter.

Time for my sunset prayer and then I'll put them all in order and then it will be time for

SCOTT BERWANGER WEEK HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL!



Okay, let's see. The earliest one I have here is June 8 and the most recent is August 4. Jeez, there's enough here for SCOTT BERWANGER MONTH HERE ON THE BLOG & MAIL. I could just FedEx them all to Jeff Tundis and have him scan them in and I wouldn't have to write anything else `til the middle of Ramadan.

Well, that's not actually true. Scott goes back and forth quite a bit on the same subjects so that's one of the reasons I thought it would be worthwhile to gather this batch into one pile so that somewhere up ahead someone else who decides to go the Scott route and completely finish his magnum opus before publishing any part of it can see the various ins and outs of Scott's decision-making. I think a cartoonist contemplating Scott's plan would definitely want to read all of what Scott has to say but all of what Scott has to say might be a bit of a chore (to say the least) for a non-cartoonist or a cartoonist sold on more traditional means of disseminating his or her work.

For those of you who haven't been reading all along, Scott Berwanger of Severna Park, MD has been writing and drawing a huge graphic novel called ANUBIS since the mid-1990s. He tried moving up from an ashcan format to a comic-book format for a period of time (there's a back cover ad for three of the issues on a late 1990s issue of CEREBUS that I comped him back when he was convinced that that kind of exposure would make all the difference for him) and ran into the same problem a lot of guys do: printers with minimum quantities and living space that soon fills up with unsold back issues of their comic title. So he moved back down to the ashcan format (folded 8.5 x 11 sheets to make 5.5 x 8.5 comic books) and then, ultimately, decided to just forego publication entirely until the whole story was finished.

Clearly a completely different approach from the 300-issue CEREBUS experiment and from virtually every independent comic I knew about which is why I thought it was worthwhile to document how his own experiment progressed. It certainly has the advantage of being a direct solution to the problems posed by publishing: basically, don't. Write and draw now and self-publish later.

I wanted to excerpt a paragraph from the June 8 letter which doesn't directly relate to the ANUBIS experiment per se, but makes a couple of interesting points. Scott Berwanger on feminism:

"Even though I am a feminist, I have absolutely no plans for marriage, or a family, or dating for that matter. And no, I'm not a homosexual. It's just that the way I see it, I would be seriously compromising the already-scarce free time I have to devote to my creativity by getting involved with a woman. I've got a creative career to fight for, by gum! And compromising that aim is simply not something I'm willing to do. Besides…I see so many of the relationships around me failing. Why would I purposely want to put myself up against that? These are strange times, indeed. Oh, well. C'est la vie."

Tomorrow: Dave Sim on Scott Berwanger on feminism



___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.

Sunday, September 02, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #356 (September 2nd, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Sunday September 2 -

Darrell Epp, the Holy Terror of Hamilton, checks in from his new digs on King Street West with some new Victor Davis Hanson columns (www.victorhanson.com) .

Dear fellow Comic Eye contributor:

I guess I'm a real Johnny Appleseed for this guy's essays. How I wish Vickie-D had as big a megaphone as that fat, lying slob, Michael Moore.


No need to get personal, there, Darrell. I'm sure Michael Moore's mother makes very good chocolate chip cookies. Didn't you find it funny the contortions that the Canadian film reviewers had to go to in order to give him the knee-jerk leftist thumbs-up reviews on SICKO? The wheels are falling off the free world's only completely publicly funded health care system (or, rather, the free world's only thirteen completely publicly funded health care systems, plural, since health care is a provincial jurisdiction) to the extent that even our Marxist Supreme Court had to come down on the side of private delivery (or, rather, an unnamed other means of delivering health care besides a completely public form that jeopardizes people's health), Quebec already has private delivery because they're, you know, Quebec so they get to do whatever they want to do and Ontario and Alberta get to pay for it, you can get an MRI for your dog faster than you can get one for yourself, etc. etc. And here comes Michael Moore to tell us that, outside of Havana, Canada has got the best health care system on the planet. Uhhhh. I love those complete Marxist Disconnect Moments.

Was that the new government-approved reality that Comrade Michael Moore just enunciated there, comrade? Or did I mishear him accidentally enunciate the old government-approved reality which we now know is (as it always was in actuality) the lickspittle lying poison of the capitalist running dog attacks on the people's glorious health care revolution?

He is Michael Moore, comrade and is therefore as unassailable as Comrade David Suzuki and Comrade Al Gore on environmentalism. Applaud loudly at the end of the film and perhaps we won't have to report for re-education.

I wish that was a joke, but as Victor Davis Hanson points out, that brand of Soviet-style revisionist Newspeak is becoming systemic on the left as they keep moving around and trying to find a coherent policy on Islamism that they can all agree on. It doesn't have to make sense – what form of Marxism does? – as long as they can all agree on it.

From the May 25 column Hanson cites three very good examples of Democrats attempting to swim upstream against reality:

"May was another normal month in the war against Islamism. At home, a delusional Rosie O'Donnell was back at it. She reminded her viewers that the United States has killed over 600,000 innocents in Iraq. And in an impassioned plea, she and her cohorts reminded us dullards that zealous jihadists must have some understandable reason for being so, well, zealous. Perhaps she meant it in the same way that the zealous Waffen SS must have had some legitimate reason for its strong feelings? "

"Jimmy Carter was also plugging another book on his Christian piety by slandering a president at war for mixing religion and politics. He reminded us that evoking God wins approval from the mainstream when it comes from the Left, only outrage when practiced on the Right. But why would Carter jettison his trope when attacking the commander-in-chief at a time of war had already won him a Nobel Prize? And why refrain from disparaging talk of a "war against terror" when you did the same about an "inordinate" fear of Communism?"

"Democrats who claim we took our eye off al Qaeda when we went into Iraq won't explain how getting out will allow us to put both eyes back on them when they're in a nuclear Pakistan. Democrats who assure us that the war is "lost" and the troop surge hopeless will not cut off funding for it, damn its architect, Gen. Petraeus, or explain how in good [conscience] they can send more soldiers into harm's way for a war they assure us we can't possibly win."


In each of those instances you have a good example of the sort of leftist consensus that forms because leftists only listen to each other and, I would maintain, that's the foundation of Newspeak, totalitarian environments which enunciate a new version of reality that supersedes the old version of reality or, as we see now, keeps returning to unworkable theories because they prefer an unworkable but ideologically pure theory to one that actually reflects the reality of any given situation. Rose O'Donnell expresses the view that there must be some reason for the jihadists to be so zealous, but she doesn't actually explain what the reason might be. The listener is supposed to draw the inference that Islamist zealousness is a direct result of American aggression and that if America just runs away, Islamist zealousness will vanish. This ignores the worldwide evidence that it is actually the Islamists who are the aggressors virtually everywhere they exist around the world.

Jimmy Carter disparages the "war against terror" from the same vantage-point. That it is America declaring war on Islamist terror that is the source of Islamist terror. Again, this ignores the worldwide evidence that it is actually the Islamists who are the terrorists virtually everywhere that they exist around the world. The United States, too, has a worldwide presence but it is only in proximity to the most extreme Islamists (in Afghanistan and Iraq) that the United States is engaged in any form of on-going military action and then only in the interests of creating a stable environment where democracy can be given a chance to develop. If the Islamists in Iraq would stop blowing themselves up next to civilians, the United States would stop hunting them down.

Right? Right.

The United States is in Germany, but it isn't attacking Germany. The United States is in Japan and it isn't attacking Japan. The United States is in Saudi Arabia and it isn't attacking Saudi Arabia. Why? Because Germany, Japan and Saudi Arabia aren't attacking US military personnel. The German, Japanese and Saudi media are relentless in their criticism of the United States and its military policies but the United States as the foremost advocate of freedom and democracy on the planet takes that as a given. The freedom to criticize is a core value of any democracy. Criticize away. Let's hash it out. If you've got a better idea of how to stabilize the situation in Iraq, the United States is all ears. But if you blow yourself up next to civilians, the United States is all guns.

At that point leftists get sullen and start talking about cultural imperialism and the damage done by MacDonald's and Kentucky Fried Chicken and Levis jeans to indigenous cultures – that is, having no validity for their view that American aggression is a universal or a constant, they simple redefine the term aggression to include pop culture material goods. Giving an Iraqi the opportunity to buy a Big Mac is just as bad as blowing yourself up next to him.

They just can't stay on the subject.

The subject, for which there is bountiful evidence, is Islamist terror, Islamist aggression and Islamist violence. Six years after 9/11 leftists are still looking for the high moral ground as sympathizers with the Victims of American Aggression. They're still trying to find a way to make everyone in the West identify with the plight of the North Vietnamese – their biggest previous success in a seriously misapprehended portrayal of reality -- by casting the worldwide religious taint of Islamism in the same mould as a civil war within the boundaries of a minor regional Asian military power.

What IS the reality? Victor Davis Hanson puts his finger on it:

Yet another poll, explained away by multiculturalists and apologists, revealed what most Americans have been led to suspect by the near weekly arrest of some conspirator or jihadist sympathizer: a lot of Muslims in the country are very angry and are sympathetic to those who kill violently. According to the Pew poll, one of four young Muslim Americans expressed approval of the tactic of suicide bombing, while six of ten assured us that no Arab Muslim was involved in September 11…both findings translate into many hundreds of thousands of Muslims living the good life here in the United States – 40 percent of whom have arrived since 1990 – who are either unhinged or favor the ideology of suicide bombing that killed 3,000 Americans.

Or BOTH. It seems obvious to me that unless you can adhere to the reality – as an individual, as a country or as a culture -- that approving of suicide bombing means that the person approving of it is unhinged then you – as an individual, as a country or as a culture -- become unhinged yourself. To even allow of the possibility of discussion there ("In SOME instances – particularly where there is a deep national or cultural grievance -- suicide bombing can be a very good and positive thing") is to start with that base approval of 25% of unhinged Muslims and to not only add to it but to feed an insatiable and completely unhinged appetite. To even allow of the possibility of discussion is to attempt to normalize blowing yourself up next to civilians – to make blowing yourself up next to women and children, killing many and maiming the rest with shrapnel into NORMAL behaviour.

Transparently, it's another form of appeasement. There was a wave of plane hijackings back in the 70s when the global policy was that there was some room for discussion there ("In SOME instances – particularly where there is a deep national or cultural grievance – plane hijacking can be a very good and positive thing") that proceeded to get out of control, WAY out of control. Once the global policy changed to "no appeasement" no negotiation with plane hijackers and a policy of assaulting the plane at the earliest opportunity, you had two or three very bloody massacres on airport tarmacs and then POOF no more plane hijackings.

Rationally, once you have established that a plane hijacking gets you IMMEDIATELY blown away by a squadron of Special Forces armed with Uzis you eliminate plane hijacking. Just as, rationally, if you negotiate with plane hijackers and give them worldwide media coverage for their "cause", control of a 747 and a free trip to anywhere they want to go, you encourage plane hijacking and make it into normal behaviour.

In a perfect world, these areas would just be governed by common sense. In a world dominated by tactical touchy-feely emotion-based leftists it's a lesson we have to teach ourselves over and over again. As I write this the Afghan government, at the behest of South Korea, is negotiating with the Taliban for the release of the 19 remaining South Korean Christian hostages, 16 of them women. The Taliban killed two men when there were no negotiations taking place. Then they stopped killing the hostages. The natural inference is that they are being appeased. And if you appease them this time all you are doing is guaranteeing that they will seize more hostages. I can certainly accept that those South Koreans went to Afghanistan wanting to do good Christian works for the local populace. I think it worth saying, however, that that was incredibly stupid. Particularly just wandering around the countryside looking for good things to do with no armed escort. There is a price to be paid for being that stupid in a war zone and that price is, usually, death where the "God looks after fools and small children" rule is not presently in effect. The nearest embassy can usually tell you when that is the case and then it's up to you as to whether you choose to do the sensible thing and GO HOME or choose to do the stupid thing and commit indirect suicide.

Oh, well. Live and don't learn.

Tomorrow: a couple of Darrell's poems

___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Saturday, September 01, 2007

Dave Sim's blogandmail #355 (September 1st, 2007)



_____________________________________________________

Fifteen Impossible Things to Believe Before Breakfast That Make You a Good Feminist

1. A mother who works a full-time job and delegates to strangers the raising of her children eight hours a day, five days a week does just as good a job as a mother who hand-rears her children full time.

2. It makes great sense for the government to pay 10 to 15,000 dollars a year to fund a daycare space for a child so its mother - who pays perhaps 2,000 dollars in taxes - can be a contributing member of society.

3. A woman's doctor has more of a valid claim to participate in the decision to abort a fetus than does the father of that fetus.

4. So long as a woman makes a decision after consulting with her doctor, she is incapable of making an unethical choice.

5. A car with two steering wheels, two gas pedals and two brakes drives more efficiently than a car with one steering wheel, one gas pedal and one brake which is why marriage should always be an equal partnership.

6. It is absolutely necessary for women to be allowed to join or participate fully in any gathering place for men, just as it is absolutely necessary that there be women only environments from which men are excluded.

7. Because it involves taking jobs away from men and giving them to women, affirmative action makes for a fairer and more just society.

8. It is important to have lower physical standards for women firepersons and women policepersons so that, one day, half of all firepersons and policepersons will be women, thus more effectively protecting the safety of the public.

9. Affirmative action at colleges and universities needs to be maintained now that more women than men are being enrolled, in order to keep from giving men an unfair advantage academically.

10. Having ensured that there is no environment for men where women don't belong (see no.6) it is important to have zero tolerance of any expression or action which any woman might regard as sexist to ensure greater freedom for everyone.

11. Only in a society which maintains a level of 95% of alimony and child support being paid by men to women can men and women be considered as equals.

12. An airline stewardess who earned $20,000 a year at the time that she married a baseball player earning $6 million a year is entitled, in the event of a divorce, to $3 million for each year of the marriage and probably more.

13. A man's opinions on how to rear and/or raise a child are invalid because he is not the child's mother. However, his financial obligation is greater because no woman gets pregnant by herself.

14. Disagreeing with any of these statements makes you anti-woman and/or a misogynist.

15. Legislature Seats must be allocated to women and women must be allowed to bypass the democratic winnowing process in order to guarantee female representation and, thereby, make democracy fairer.

_____________________________________________________



Rick Veitch's reaction to his 1980s story "Solar Plexus" in his new collection, SHINY BEASTS?

Looking back at it today, I cringe. There are way too many throwaway panels and, story-wise, the middle has all the depth and complexity of a pre-Ant Man TALES TO ASTONISH. I actually debated including "Solar Plexus" in this collection, but in the end figured the poor thing deserved to get printed in the correct order at least once (EPIC ran pages 6 and 7 out of sequence). And to be fair, the bit about the dance of the stars isn't half bad. And some of the space visuals really do pop.

Rick goes on to discuss several instances of pure innovation on his part, always striving for something absolutely and resolutely new. Again, it was part of the function of being the first generation to realize that comic books were going to be here for a long time to come and in a variety of forms – it wasn't just going to be a matter of DC super-heroes and Marvel super-heroes and everything else being ephemeral and "catch as catch can". Had we seen what the environment was going to be like (pretty much exactly that) in the far-off year of 2007, we might all have cut our wrists. But, no, it was an age of constant invention with the structure, the design, the narrative, the subject matter. And Archie was a perfect example of an editor – probably the first ever at Marvel with the experimental EPIC magazine -- who was willing to go a long way to get the right look for a story if the creator had a sufficiently innovative idea he wanted to try, as with Rick's "Ghosts in the Machine".

There was no Photoshop then, so the visual of the computerized environment with its ghostly flickering robot soldiers had to be created by hand. To get it, I pencilled the whole story, then inked the robots in full silhouette and drew the computer grids with pen. Those pages were then photographically reversed by Archie's production staff, so white became black and vice versa. In the new white areas, I painted the details of the robots, covering their color with a white line zipatone to give the book the look and feel of video. The new black areas became a full 100% black, something that was impossible to get with my regularly painted work, giving the story a visual snap.

And it certainly does. Even in the digitally re-mastered form you really register the fact that the black background is a "super black" that you just couldn't get by any normal means even with the advantage of Photoshop. Essentially what Rick did was to take the computerized tropes of the Disney film TRON and to figure out how to replicate them in one of the only two full-process-colour comic books that existed at the time (the other was HEAVY METAL). Now, a natural response in our present context where TRON is little more than a quaint antique -- the cinematic equivalent of a Pong game -- would be "Why would you bother?" But that misses the point of the context in which he developed the look. For all any of us knew at the time, this new "computerized look" (which was something eerie to behold as I can attest from my viewing of the first run of TRON in theatres) represented a parallel universe of perception that would one day overtake and eliminate traditional cinema in the same way that talkies had made silent films (Mel Brooks aside) obsolete. In a way it's true – super-hero movies were largely made possible by the development and refinement of CGI effects which in turn were made possible by generations of technicians standing on the shoulders of the technicians who created TRON in the first place and super-hero movies at this present moment rule Hollywood with an iron fist (hmm. Iron Fist. Who can we get to play Iron Fist?). But that involved the computer innovations moving over in the direction of the look of traditional cinema and devouring territory there, not creating their own "computer world" apart from traditional cinema (the race is still on to come up with the first video game to duplicate a big budget action flick on another front in that particular war). The pure computerized look of TRON that Rick has captured so well proved, ultimately, to be just window-dressing. But it might well have been the spot to strike where the iron was hottest and Rick is to be applauded for being the first one there to figure out how to do it cheaply, relatively easily and effectively. And applauded as well that he did it purely for the sake of the single story – depending on how long it took Disney to "let go" of the idea that they had the wave of the future by the tail with that TRON look, Rick might have been able to commandeer a large advance for himself by sending them a copy of that issue of EPIC and saying, "I've figured out how to do it on paper: are you interested in paying me x amount of dollars to do the TRON comic book?" And then building a studio of guys who each specialized in one stage of the process and "cashing in" until the fad vanished.

The only odd-ball here [which Rick reprints in full colour book-ending his back-of-the-book commentaries] is L'IL TINY COMICS, originally commissioned as filler to run in single columns interspersed among typeset copy in the back of HEAVY METAL. Free to experiment, I structured L'IL TINY more like a mutant literary novel than a war comic. This was done partly as a joke, partly as a contrast to the sparse writing of the French reprints [from METAL HURLANT, HM's French "parent" magazine at the time] and partly because I'd just had my head rearranged by Henry Miller. About half of L'IL TINY is swiped, with me sampling Miller's words, phrases, sentences and, in a couple of spots, whole paragraphs from TROPIC OF CANCER and BLACK SPRING. In my mind, I was somehow connecting Miller's vivid phrasing to the way Kanigher wrote dialogue. Slicing and dicing Miller's rhythmic interior monologue into tiny captions that crowd the meandering continuity seemed to create something new and strange; a poetic approach to comics that, to my knowledge, hadn't been explored. I only wish I'd had the chops to write the stuff myself, rather than cannibalizing someone else.

I think Roy Lichtenstein would understand.


I think a lot of creators would get a charge out of this book whether it's from the digital re-mastering where Rick endeavours to prove that if you just work and rework every corner of every panel on extreme magnification with Photoshop, you too can become Rich Corben (you can't, but it is an awe-inspiring attempt), the dazzling double-page image that concludes his collaboration with Steve Bissette on "Monkey See" or the extensive annotations at the back which really gives the flavour of the strange time period occupied by those hard-partying Kubert School Boys (did Muriel ever find out about this?) who managed to have a whale of a time often without running water and still managed to be reasonably productive and bring their multitude of influences to the printed page. It didn't START with SWAMP THING, y'know?

If your comic store won't order you one (it isn't a Marvel or DC super-hero revamp, after all) try this experiment: go into a mainstream bookstore and try ordering it by its ISBN number 978-0-9624864-9-4. Rick's given Diamond an exclusive on his bookstore sales and it would be interesting to see how that's working out for him. $16.95 US. Mature readers.



___________________________________________________

REPLIES POSTED ON THE CEREBUS YAHOO! GROUP
___________________________________________________
If you wish to contact Dave Sim, you can mail a letter (he does NOT receive emails) to:

Aardvark Vanaheim, Inc
P.O. Box 1674
Station C
Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 4R2

Looking for a place to purchase Cerebus phonebooks? You can do so online through Win-Mill Productions -- producers of Following Cerebus. Convenient payment with PayPal:

Win-Mill Productions

Or, you can check out Mars Import:

Mars Import

Or ask your local retailer to order them for you through Diamond Comics distributors.