A “call to arms”.

Posted October 8, 2009 by comicsstudies
Categories: Uncategorized

I’m Andrew Edwards, the Assistant Director for Great Britain for ICS. Pete has kindly let me loose on the Comic Link blog. You’ll be hearing from me here from now on.

Here’s some information about me: my work background is in education and libraries, and I’ve worked as a high school teacher for a few years before becoming a librarian. I’ve also been writing about comics for a little while now, with work appearing mainly on the Sequart website. I’m currently at work on a critical study of the Alan Moore scripted issues of Swamp Thing for Sequart Books. I’m also working on other bits and pieces of comics related criticism, which I’ll tell you more about as and when they happen.

I’m passionate about comics and I want to see them continue to reach their potential as a medium and become wholly accepted by mainstream society in the same way as, say, TV and film. As such, I was pleased to read Charles Hatfield’s blog recently, where he discussed what he saw  to be the steps needed to ensure that Comics Studies as an academic discipline would continue to thrive. You can read it at http://www.thoughtballoonists.com/2009/09/the-state-of-comics-studies.html

 The main point I would add is that I think more still needs to be done to ensure that comics remain in the public eye. Academia, although important, is only a part of the landscape in terms of how we all can promote the study, understanding, recognition and cultural legitimacy of comics. So this is a “call to arms”, if you like. Along with the academics, I want to see more teachers using comics, more librarians buying comics and graphic novels for their collections, more critics writing about comics, more people talking about comics, more blogs and podcasts focusing on comics, more TV and radio programmes about comics, more magazines about comics…

Basically, I want to see anything and everything that may help to ensure that our beloved medium remains vital, energized, healthy and intact for future generations.

Please contact us at ICS with your thoughts and ideas for helping comics survive and thrive in this new millennium. Any UK based readers of this blog are free to contact me with any UK specific ideas to help boost the profile and awareness of the medium. I can be reached on icsactivity@gmail.com

Gaining mainstream acceptance will only the first step. Maintaining a consistent presence in the public eye will be an ongoing mission, and it’s one that I’m proud to be a part of.

Advertisements

2010 Conferences at Comic-Cons

Posted October 7, 2009 by comicsstudies
Categories: Uncategorized

Peter Coogan, Director of the Institute for Comics Studies here.  I’ll be announcing myself like that from now on because a new blogger is joining Comics Link, Andrew Edwards, who is the Assistant Director of ICS for Great Britain.  He’s representing ICS at the Possibilities and Perspectives Conference, held in conjunction with the Thought Bubble con in Leeds in November.

On to today’s post.  Today I completed three calls for participation for conferences or academic tracks to be held in conjunction with comic-cons next year, though in truth since each conference runs at more than one edition of each comic-con, really we’re talking about seven distinct events for next year.

The first is the Comics Arts Conference-Wonder Con (deadline 12/1/2009) on April 2-4, 2010.  The CAC-WC is not an Institute for Comics Studies production, but I’m the organizing chair of the CAC at the moment, so I’m going the CFP.  2010 is the fourth year for the Comics Arts Conference at Wonder Con.  The folks at Comic-Con International (which also runs the San Diego Comic-Con, Wonder Con, and the Alternative Press Expo) were so happy with the work we’ve done at Comic-Con that we all decided to expand to Wonder Con.  The submission site works for both CAC-WC and CAC-CCI (deadline March 1), so that’s two of the seven events for next year.

The next is the Comics Studies Conference-Chicago (deadline 12/1/2009) on April 16-18, held in conjunction with C2E2–the Chicago Comic and Entertainment Expo, at  McCormick Place in Chicago.  This is a new conference put on by ICS, and we’ll be running a second set of sessions at the New York Comic-Con, October 8-10, 2010. The submission site works for both conferences (and all the ICS conferences), so that brings us to four of the seven events.

The final three are three Wizard World Universities, with WWU-Anaheim coming up first (submission deadline 12/1/2009) on April 16-18, then WWU-Philly on June 11-13 (deadline March 15, 2010), and WWU-Chicago on August 12-15 (proposal deadline 5/15, 2010), rounding out the total to seven.  Jason Tondro is acting as the WWU-Anaheim organizing and local chair. The same submission site works for all the WWU academic tracks.

But we still have one more!  The Dragon*Con Comics and Popular Culture Conference (Labor Day weekend, September 3-6, 2010, in Atlanta, Georgia) is also an ICS production, run by Matt Brown.  I didn’t count this in the seven because I didn’t make a CFP for it today, but the ICS submission site works for it as well.

Over the next week I want to talk about the different visions each of these conferences or academic tracks has and how they relate to each other and to ICS’s mission.

See you on Friday!

Superfolks and Superhero Literature

Posted September 30, 2009 by comicsstudies
Categories: Uncategorized

Robert Mayer’s satirical novel Superfolks (1977) is credited by Kurt Busiek and Alan Moore with inspiring, in part, Astro City and Watchmen, though with Moore the real influence can be seen in his Twilight of the Superheroes proposal  and Superman: Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? Superfolks concerns a middle-aged superhero, whose codename is never given but who is referred to as “Indigo” (i.e. “Big Blue”), a Superman analog, who has retired into his secret identity of reporter David Brinkley and “slipped into the humdrum routine of middle-class life” with a wife, two children, and a home in the suburbs.  He hails originally from the planet Cronk, but had to give up his superhero career because his powers faded, a fate that was engineered by Pxyzsyzygy (a Mr. Mxyzptlk analogue), who bought up multinational consumer products companies and mixed ground cronkite into all sorts of products, building materials, and the water supply to induce chronic, low-level cronkite poisoning in Indigo and drive him from superheroing. The other superheroes have retired or otherwise withdrawn: Batman and Robin were killed in an Batmobile collision with a bus carrying African American children to the suburbs, Superman is missing and presumed dead after a kryptonite meteor fell on Metropolis, the Marvel Family died in a lightning strike, Captain Mantra (a Captain Marvel analogue) is living in a sanitarium after seeing his sister, Mary Mantra, cut to shreds by an Amtrak train, and Wonder Woman is an associate editor for Ms. Magazine and a leading spokeswoman for feminist causes.  All of which are part of Pxyzsyzygy’s plot to eliminate superheroes from Earth and ultimately replace God.

The plot of the novel concerns a CIA attempt to draw Indigo out of retirement as a setup for his assassination, which is demanded by the Soviet Union as part of a nuclear disarmament treaty—the Soviets want Indigo eliminated as a possible nuclear defense for the United States to reinforce the doctrine of mutually assured destruction, though this turns out to be a blind for an assassination attempt on the President, to be replaced by the Vice-President, who is a Soviet stooge.  Indigo discovers the plots against him with the assistance of Captain Mantra, and with the unwitting assistance of Elastic Man (i.e. Plastic Man), who slingshots Indigo into cronkite-free outerspace, he regains his powers, and ultimately speaks Pxyzsyzygy’s name at the syzygy (the precise point where the Earth is in conjunction with the Sun), thereby banishing the elf to the fifth dimension for four years.

While Meyer does not take the superhero genre seriously—his satire is often rooted in pointing out the logical inconsistencies and silliness of the genre—it does point to the deforming effects superheroes would have on human politics (a theme taken up by more serious works such as Watchmen and Batman: The Dark Knight Returns) and superhero sexuality, which probably had not been dealt with since Larry Niven’s 1971 essay “Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex” extrapolating what would happen if Superman tried to mate with Lois, based upon the conditions of his powers set in the comics themselves (the super sperm hunting for human eggs is a bizarre side effect of Kryptonian ejaculation, which is also mentioned in the context of Superboy masturbating, itself probably the first time such a topic was mentioned in print).  In these things, Mayer did lay the ground work for later, serious considerations of the superhero genre, both in comics and in prose.

Where Superman Went Wrong

Posted September 26, 2009 by comicsstudies
Categories: Uncategorized

In my history of American comics class, we’re reading volume one of the Superman Chronicles, covering Action Comics 1-13.  The last issue in this collection features the first appearance of the Ultra-Humanite. The Ultra-Humanite, while a great character (and the superhero genre’s first transsexual–through a brain transplant rather than reassignment surgery, but still), marks a transition in the genre that probably kept it from maturing

Up to this point, Superman fought people in power—lax mine owners, corrupt officials, war profiteers, brutal prison wardens— who failed to live up to the responsibilities with which their power endowed them. The problems he faced all had ordinary human causes and could be solved through ordinary human institutions—in fact the early adventures of Superman are primarily stories of Clark Kent’s exposure of corruption through his newspaper stories; he only uses his Superman identity to enable him to get the story and write the expose. But the Ultra-Humanite, a power-mad supervillain who claims to have been behind many of the foes Superman has faced, alters this equation. If the Ultra-Humanite is behind the Cab Protective Association racket (Action Comics #13) or the graft that results in shoddy subway construction (Action Comics #14), then ordinary reform that average citizens can fight for in the political process is useless. The threat to society is shifted from inside the halls of power to outside the society, which means that defending society from these threats implies a defense of the status quo.

Because the source of society’s problems is now projected outward, the genre can moves away from direct confrontation of social ills and from serious social commentary.

The second Superman story that went wrong is the unpublished k-metal story.  In this story kryptonite (or k-metal) weakens Superman and he ends up revealing his secret identity to Lois.  The story ends with Lois pointing out that Superman would benefit from having someone to share his secret with, and they agree to be partners in crimefighting, and presumably in romance as well.  The story was Jerry Siegel’s attempt to move Superman and Lois toward a Nick and Nora Charles characterization, a more adult and mature presentation of the two reporters as equals.  The story was turned down by DC’s editors and the Superman-Lois-Clark triangle was enshrined until the 1990s.

Think what might have happened had Superman continued to face social issues directly and done so in a adult relationship with Lois.  The genre might have gone on to evolve in more interesting ways, instead of being as tied as it was to adolescent power fantasies and love triangles (with only two actual people involved).  Perhaps (though I feel this is unlikely), characters would have been allowed to age.  But I’ll take that problem up in a future post.

The Propulsive Pugnacious Power of Popeye

Posted September 23, 2009 by comicsstudies
Categories: Uncategorized

And I don’t just mean his fisks!   We read the first Popeye adventure in Thimble Theater for my History of American Comics class on Monday and when I reads Popeye, I wantsta talk Popeye (and talk like Popeye). I assigned my students to follow up on R.C. Harvey’s analysis from  “What this Country Needed Was a Good Segar” in The Aesthetics of the Funnies. The question I had them address was:

Harvey says that Segar exploits the visual-verbal balance of the medium to promote suspension of disbelief and open the door to fantasy—we accept impossible realities because of his drawing style.  How else does Segar exploit the capacities of the medium?  How do the words and pictures combine to convey plot, pacing, characterization, mood, tone, or some other element (or the necessity of reading the words and pictures together, as Inge pointed out in the article on Outcault—how does Segar exploit the interdependence of words and pictures in his comic strips)?  Identify and explicate one instance of Segar’s mastery of the medium.

Harvey gives the example of Popeye’s forearms:

“Segar’s finishing touch was a stroke of visual comic genius. Popeye’s bulging forearms, those watermelons attached to his body with pipe cleaners, give “ham-fisted” a visual metaphor. Although the graphic device defies anatomy and affronts common sense, it succeeds remarkably in suggesting pugilistic power. Popeye’s arms evoke the velocity
of his swing: it’s as if the centrifugal force of repeated roundhouse punches have shoved all the sailor’s muscles into his extremities. His arms suggest the enormous impact of his blows: ballooning around his hands, his arms convert his fists to sledgehammers that gain more striking force by being at the ends of long handles. In comparison, the bulging biceps of conventionally constructed comic book superheroes seem scarcely sufficient to their tasks-as if too far removed from the point of the impact, the striking fist. But all Popeye’s muscles-and most of his weight-are bunched just where they’ll be felt the most: right behind his knuckles. Conceptually and visually, Popeye is the comic epitome of the perfect fighter.” (164-165)

This assignment was well worth doing. It forced the students to attend to the visuals of Segar’s strip, specifically to the comics-specific elements of the art.  And they came up with a lot of good stuff–it’s amazing how comics analysis can emerge from reading and discussing even without much theory (besides McCloud’s Understanding Comics).

One aspect of Segar’s work that I asked the students to look at was the propelling nature of his strips.  Why do we feel compelled to keep reading?  Why did I have to repeatedly force myself to stop reading Popeye at 4 am when I was working my way through the Complete EC Segar Popeye?  One student came up with an answer, cliffhangers.

The student pointed out that every day’s strip ended with a suspenseful cliffhanger that added an extra layer to the plot, but still managed to be a surprise and to propel him to read the next day’s strip.  Another student even called this “annoying” because it made her want to keep reading.  Here’s a three day sequence of the days’ final panel:

Popeye cliffhanger 1

Castor, Olive, and Ham’s worried looks makes us wonder what will happen next.

Popeye cliffhanger 2

We know Snork’s intentions, but will Popeye notice him?

Popeye cliffhanger 3

Even though essentially nothing has happened in this day’s strip, the suspense builds because we are waiting for the tension to resolve–we’re waiting for Snork to fire his pistol. Will Popeye die?  Will he stop Snork?

Of course, Popeye ends up taking 16 bullets from Snork and surviving because of the luck he rubbed off the Wiffle Hen, but at this moment we don’t know that.  And the fight between Snork and Popeye occurs off panel. We experience it through the emotions of Castor, Olive, and Ham, who can’t see the fight themselves.  It makes for very compelling reading.

And that’s something that newspapers seem to have forgotten. Comic strips are one of the few things that newspapers have an essential monopoly on (or did until recently).  The newspaper was the only place to get your daily fix of the comic strips, but newspapers kept shrinking and shrinking the size of the strips.  Segar was able to use six panels for each day’s installment, but cartoonists today are lucky to be able to fit three into the space alloted, and little action can be shown.  If strips had maintained Segar’s propulsive genius, people might have kept buying and reading newspapers and they wouldn’t be in the situation they are in today (though I realize there are bigger issues, but comic strips from the beginning were a circulation booster but they rarely got the credit they deserved).

And at their current reproduction size, cartoonists cannot convey the intensity of emotion of the old days.   I’ll close with this clip from later in this adventure showing Olive Oyl and the look of hate:

Olive's hatred

Ain’t she marvelous?!

Professor Garfield

Posted September 19, 2009 by comicsstudies
Categories: Uncategorized

Change of plan.  I was going to post on Robert Mayer’s novel Superfolks, but from out of nowhere the other day Bob Levy called me to introduce himself and Professor Garfield because it has a lot of overlap with the work of the Institute for Comics Studies.

I’m not going to do much more than provide the link because the site is self-explanatory (and very, very cool), but everyone working on comics studies should be aware of the great work that they’re doing.

Superheroes: The Undergrowth of Literature

Posted September 15, 2009 by comicsstudies
Categories: Uncategorized

Ah, back on schedule.

Before we get to today’s topic I want to plug a talk by Gordon Smith, the special effects wizard of the X-Men movies.  We had him on a panel at the superhero costume conference at the Met last summer.  He’s sent word about a talk called “Pandora’s Box” that he’s giving at his studio in Tornoto on October 17 and 18, 1-5 pm.  He’s got an amazing career and has done a lot for the special effects industry and for actors by reducing the toxicity of a lot of effects chemicals.

Now, on to today’s topic.

I’m working on an article for a friend’s e-magazine on superhero literature and the superhero in literature. While novels like Michael Chabon’s Cavalier and Klay or Jonathan Lethem’s Fortress of Solitude have gotten a lot of positive attention for their discussion of the superhero genre and their use of it as a metaphor mine, and  Austin Grossman’s Soon I Will Be Invincible actually works as a literary fiction in the form of a superhero story, it wasn’t always the case that the superhero genre was viewed as a fit subject for literature.

A few years ago I came across a reference to Gillian Freeman’s The Undergrowth of Literature, a survey of fantasy literature that “overtly or covertly, supplies the stimulus which so many people need, from the romance of Woman’s Own to the sado-masochism of Man’s Story.” And stimulus here means sexual stimulus–the book is a survey of pornographic literature and bondage magazines and books, but it includes a chapter titled “Minor Tendencies” about superheroes and comics. Freeman (punny name for someone writing about B&D) seems to have trouble seeing the comics she looks at and her lens of fetishism colors her readings of Batman and Wonder Woman comics, presumably as well as some British comics that I’m unfamiliar with.

Freemen wonders whether “the trappings of fetishist sexual behaviour” that she sees running through superhero comics “form a basis for adult fetishism.”  She perceives the Werthamite vision of Batman and Robin as gay and says that they are clothed “in garments which in any other context could only be considered fetishist.” Which is as much as to say that she doesn’t understand the role of the costume in the superhero genre. She seems to insist on this fetish reading of the costume, identifying the costumes as being made of rubber–including Captain America’s costume, which in the 1960s was clearly made of chain mail and designed to protect him.  Likewise, she misreads Batman’s costume, “he is naked except for tight shorts, satin cape, high boots, wide belt with heavy clasp, long leather gloves, and a rubber hood and mask.”  Perhaps she only looked at one issue and there was a coloring error. And yet this insistence on reading fetish-wear into Batman’s costume–the satin cape and the rubber hood–point to the conclusion that she sees what she wants to see.

On the other hand, she quotes one of Wertham’s stories about a boy who choked a girl in imitation of a comic book story he read and she notes that it is often reported that television Westerns are responsible for the deaths of boys who hang themselves experimentally for kicks. She refutes this charge by pointing out that Eskimo children play a sometimes fatal hanging game. She concludes this section with, “Western films?  I doubt it.”

But she goes on to assert that comics may be to blame for developing sexual fetish practices. First she notes that adult ideas get passed on to later generations of children when they have lost their potency, citing “Ring-a-Roses” (i.e. “Ring Around the Rosie”) as a contemporary meaningless nursery game that started as a plague song (though this explanation for the origin of “Ring” has been debunked).  Westerns, which were originally aimed at adults, ran as children’s Saturday morning programming, but “it is out of line with tradition…that while particular fetishes are flourishing, elements of them are already being distilled into the children’s comic paper” and proposes that a vicious circle is created whereby the fetish associations portrayed in comics and foster tendencies, which would remain dormant without the weekly or monthly stimulation or aggravation of the comics, and are actively nourished into “major deviations which will impede mature relationships later on.”

Though she concludes that there is no way to know the true effects of the masks, capes, boots, manacles, and violence in children’s comics, and that these portrayals may in fact exorcise a child’s fantasy needs even as they might feed an adults.  In the end, she concludes that the greater potential danger is in censorship rather than the exposure of children to fetishistic depictions in comics.

The point here in connection with superheroes and literature is that for Freeman, superheroes are not a fit or worthy subject for literary consideration–they are only fodder, and not very healthy fodder, for small minds.  While her concern with fetishism and pornography (and she directly states that kids comics are not pornographic, but pornography is a central subject of her book) could be seen as driving out other considerations about the superhero genre, it seems to me that her thinking about superheroes is fairly well in line with most literary thinking of the time, though certainly not the thinking among comics-reading college students (and Stan Lee, who spoke at a lot of colleges at the time) of the late 1960s about Marvel comics and comics as a kind of modern day mythology.

How could superheroes be a fit topic for literary fiction?  I’ll explore that on Friday with a discussion of Robert Mayer’s Superfolks.