tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post721699748330774851..comments2024-03-28T12:26:00.040-04:00Comments on ILLUSTRATION ART: THE LOST VOCABULARY OF VISUAL STORYTELLING, day 4David Apatoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-78673936027222520432014-10-22T10:50:32.166-04:002014-10-22T10:50:32.166-04:00Frank-- I agree those are all relevant considerati...Frank-- I agree those are all relevant considerations, and any evaluation of the quality of art should be tailored to the artist's objectives for that piece. There's no point in measuring, say, Alex Raymond's simple minded Flash Gordon strip, with its dazzling drawings, against Charles Shulz's psychologically complex but simply drawn Peanuts strip. Nevertheless, I think that does leave us free to decide which artistic ambitions we believe are more worthy than others. David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-44486229583813130582014-10-21T02:13:46.803-04:002014-10-21T02:13:46.803-04:00Been tracking Starr's comic work for a little ...Been tracking Starr's comic work for a little while now, I'm taking notes on this four part article for his strong points.<br /><br />However, I find problematic to compare Starr's work to Ware's in the way it's done here; those are two comics that have been produced having with two very different audiences in mind, in two different time periods; two different contexts that have different principles of what's "good" or "bad". <br /><br />If you judge a piece of art with the principles of a different context, the piece will most likely be seen in a bad, or at least odd, light, because it didn't fulfill that other context's principles of what's good (nor did it aim to), while at the same time, you won't be able to see see much virtue in the piece, since the principles you're using don't consider those virtues as such. <br /><br />As an example, an older guy, used to comics from decades past, may look at today's comics as bland, crude or garish; and only appreciate newer stuff if it apes to the styles he's used to, and even then considering them a pale imitation. On the other hand, a younger guy used to current comics, may see older comics as formulaic or unexciting; whatever he may deem "good" in those older comics, he's already seen it in newer ones (assimilated, first or second hand, from that older stuff), while lacking all the other stuff also incorporated in the years since, that he takes as a given in newer comics.<br /><br />My expectatives and frame of reference are not the same when I read an indie book, or an european BD, or a shojo manga, or a Silver Age Marvel comic. Ideally, I think, one should abandon even the expectatives given by the frame of something being an indie book, an european BD, a shojo manga, etc. and judge a work without preconcieved ideas, but by the principles the work establishes in and of itself.Franknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-79917404363644646392014-03-17T05:55:57.876-04:002014-03-17T05:55:57.876-04:00I liked the first two images very much. It's a...I liked the first two images very much. It's a pity that comics nowadays offer children no possibility of having a rich imagination...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08926970285297866204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-40066684901461925692014-03-14T19:35:56.842-04:002014-03-14T19:35:56.842-04:00Is your definition of "quiet moments" wh...Is your definition of "quiet moments" when people stand around and talk? Because that would be my definition of a talky moment. "Talky" being generally understood as a pejorative in a visual medium. Which is to say, if we want to speak of the lost vocabulary of visual storytelling, we should start by acknowledging that the best writing in visual forms has always been where dialogue doesn't play into it. The reverence for strong "silent film" storytelling is warranted in both film and comics. So I find it a bit difficult to square the idea of Starr being a strong writer, with the amount of standing around and talking that goes on. Not to mention that the one silent film action sequence I'm seeing, of the guy magically flying over that paper thin wall, doesn't impress.<br /><br />I do think there is a nice naturalism to Starr's figural groupings in those talky moments, especially how he hides figures so only a little part of the face shows. And his framing of midground elements with foreground ones is very solid. And his hands are good, as you've mentioned. And maybe, after all, one must play to one's strengths.<br /><br /><br />kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-60803605510139389192014-03-14T16:19:26.457-04:002014-03-14T16:19:26.457-04:00Vicki-- Thank you for writing. I am aware of Seth...Vicki-- Thank you for writing. I am aware of Seth's work and his tragic death in Japan. I admire what he accomplished and I hope that readers will follow your link to see Seth's work, which deserves an audience. <br /><br />Kev Ferrara-- I love that Toth page; I bought that comic book as a kid and that page knocked my socks off. Looking at it years later, I still regard it as comic art at its best. <br /><br />You're right, we would probably differ over the use of the word "quiet"-- the story has to do with quiet stalking, but to me, the brushwork seems to a riot of bold, slashing lines (unlike, say, a Blechman). But I attach no significance to the label. If that's what you mean, I agree that Toth had it in spades.<br /><br />On your comparison between Starr and Toth, I agree that their venues don't account for all the difference, I think the venues just reinforced their pre-existing proclivities. I think that compared to Toth, Raymond's Rip Kirby is similarly staid and compartmented. (Flash Gordon, which gave Raymond both the elbow room and subject matter to be more aggressive, is a little closer).<br /><br />As an aside, I think the comparison between Rip Kirby and On Stage is an interesting one (made even more interesting by the fact that King Features wanted Starr replace Raymond when he died, and Starr turned them down in order to give his own strip a try). I agree that nobody sparkled like Raymond, but I will surprise you by telling you that in a number of ways I prefer Starr's strip-- I think it was a much smarter strip, better written with more sensitivity to facial expressions and a better understanding of body language. (Raymond had a limited collection of facial templates thinly disguised by goofy mustaches and other obvious props.) David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-63492903820289443082014-03-14T14:54:18.462-04:002014-03-14T14:54:18.462-04:00David,
I do understand the limitations Starr'...David,<br /><br />I do understand the limitations Starr's venues placed on his creativity. I don't think that accounts fully for the (imo) staid quality of his output. The ultra-clean virtuosity of Raymond on Rip Kirby <a href="http://cdn.comicartfans.com/Images/Category_13461/subcat_99385/RIPK.jpg" rel="nofollow">sparkles </a> by comparison.<br /><br />Regarding Toth's quiet moments, we may get into a definitional war over what exactly constitutes a "quiet moment". Leaving that aside, I don't have time now to really search for the very best Toth quiet moments. But, anyway, <a href="http://www.comicbookbrain.com/large-alex-toth-white-devil-yellow-devil-page.php" rel="nofollow"> the very first toth page I grabbed on google </a> has a beautiful quiet feeling... but with the addition of suspense and intrigue. And then the beautiful panel which causes the effect of surprise when the attacker appears out of nowhere, figuratively and graphically... it's just sublime sequential artistry.kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-18805060265669956362014-03-13T19:12:03.293-04:002014-03-13T19:12:03.293-04:00Kev Ferrara-- I agree with you that Starr's ta...Kev Ferrara-- I agree with you that Starr's talent was not restless like Toth's, but I also think that the publications where the artists appeared made a big difference. I think the apogee of Toth's restless creativity took place in publications that gave Toth a long leash (Warren magazines, DC mystery comics, hot wheels, etc. in the 60s and 70s). These magazines encouraged bold splash panels, panels shaped like lightning bolts, figures popping out of panels and creative word balloons. Comic strips never permitted this flexibility, both for formatting reasons and because strips catered to a more general audience; southern conservative newspapers would've had little tolerance for an artist like Toth.<br /><br />I'd be interested in what you think of as Toth's "brilliant quiet moments" Most of the work I can think of along those lines is earlier work, in EC where Harvey Kurtzman was pushing back and restraining Toth, or a few choice moments in the Zorro books. <br /><br />Sean Farrell wrote: "Starr's confident drawing is the polar opposite of Ware's tepid humor." <br /><br />There is a political / cultural subtext to much of this discussion which I have avoided because we have more than our hands full with the aesthetics alone. But it is inescapable that Starr's strip, including its art, focuses on idealized, attractive people with strong chins, who speak intelligently and have long term, fulfilling marriages. The confident brush strokes of the 50s and 60s was a style befitting this message. <br /><br />At some point it became acceptable to say out loud that this was not the whole story; that there were gay people being tortured and oppressed, or that there were interesting, subversive people with the vision to see the lies in the system. Those confident brush strokes began to turn into scraggly lines. OK. <br /><br />However, the pendulum seems to have swung so far that graphic novels are now full of cringing and moaning types who are withered neurotics, incapable of fulfilling relationships or idealistic action. <br /><br />Chester Brown says he can't manage a decent relationship with a partner so he is resigned to paying for sex. Until recently, Chris Ware's work was obsessed with loneliness, alienation and abandonment. When Crumb and Pekar began this trend years ago, their work was an entertaining anomaly going against the cultural grain. Now there seems to be nothing but desolation in this field, as far as the eye can see. <br /><br />One wonders how adolescents will learn to develop constructive, positive relationships in a culture so entertained by the low and the depraved.David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-64038554315804766262014-03-11T19:03:31.908-04:002014-03-11T19:03:31.908-04:00Starr's storytelling was more moderate, and co...<b>Starr's storytelling was more moderate, and conformed to the requirements of a strip that had to satisfy different formats in hundreds of newspapers. I like stories that shout (like Toth's) but I also like stories that purr or hum.</b><br /><br />I think this opposition you are setting up, moderate versus shouting, doesn't track. The reason Toth's stuff looks startling is because (in his mature work, anyway) he is thinking freshly about how to achieve his storytelling effects every time out of the box. That freshness, that feeling of real aesthetic life that his work exhibits is not at all the same thing as sensationalism for its own sake. It is simply restless talent and dedicated craft working in tandem. (Also, Toth's work, as I see it, is filled with brilliant quiet moments. But their brilliance makes them loud.)<br /><br />I don't find the talent of Starr to be of the restless variety. There is some nice subtlety in Starr's acting choices/ideas, and his staging can be smart indeed. But most often I find myself starved by his artistic vocabulary... Which seems to consist mostly of conventions; the standard easily-referenced shot set-ups and figures, and establishing shots from the most easily referenceable or drawable perspective. Additionally, his inking style is mostly constituted of the inking conventions developed by Alex Raymond during his run on Rip Kirby, (as the influences of modern slick-mag illustrations and photo-reference changed Raymond's approach). Noting the above, that Starr's writing seems to also be built of conventions seems unlikely to be a coincidence. One meets intelligent, deadline-driven artists all the time whose artistic vocabulary consists solely of "what worked for the other guy" and "what reference do I have on hand or is the easiest to get." <br /><br /><br /><br /> <br /><br /> kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-79700309946915566312014-03-11T15:09:17.322-04:002014-03-11T15:09:17.322-04:00PS: The New Yorker has been host to cartoons havin...PS: The New Yorker has been host to cartoons having laughs on the delicate and feeble nature of domesticated life for decades, so Ware isn't on any new ground, but that guy paralyzed over buying or not buying the answering machine may be saying more about what's become of people in an age of endless choices than anyone wants to know. It's kind of scary to think such paralysis is something a great many people can relate to.Sean Farrellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-41405098588321959832014-03-11T10:03:36.902-04:002014-03-11T10:03:36.902-04:00The example by Ware is placing an abstract frame a...The example by Ware is placing an abstract frame around the absurdities or weirdness of being, which adolescents and disoriented people on drugs often find hysterical. It is funny, but not in a particularly warm, charming or edifying way as were Nancy and Louie which also played off the ordinary.<br /><br />In this case, a man reduced to humiliation in a waiting room does elicit a certain empathy, but if so, does it do so at the expense of the absurd humor? Maybe so or maybe not, but the drawing itself is somewhat pathetic in its stiffness and that is the point I think David was making, that the pacing and timing lack a certain power and elegance of an earlier era. Such is a legitimate and glaring understatement as we can see from this series of posts with Starr. <br /><br />What the posts are also asking is, have we also lost our alertness, some of our wit, our wherewithal, visual clarity and orientation along with the loss of our skills? Did they all come together as part of a package?<br /><br /><br />Sean Farrellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-60600709354724731742014-03-11T01:23:42.215-04:002014-03-11T01:23:42.215-04:00David, what a nice series with Starr, I really app...David, what a nice series with Starr, I really appreciate it and the comments are as good. Starr's confident drawing is the polar opposite of Ware's tepid humor. Ware seems to be trying to do what Ernie Bushmiller did with Nancy and Harry Hanan did with a one panel cartoon called Louie which some may remember from the 1960s and 70s. Both Nancy and Louie were masterpieces of humor and storytelling regarding the simplest events of daily life.<br /><br />The subject of the use of hands, storytelling itself and other aspects of being with people seem to be getting lost in the almost, but not quite relationships of telecommunications.Sean Farrellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-68953815872477683922014-03-07T14:14:24.248-05:002014-03-07T14:14:24.248-05:00David, I would like to introduce you to a comic bo...David, I would like to introduce you to a comic book artist whose pictures tell the inside of the story, using many of the subtleties that you have found missing in many contemporary comic books. His name is Seth Fisher, and he died in 2006, with a small but brilliant output. The comic books he worked on were mostly superhero ones, but his artwork raised them above the adolescent level that we think of with superhero stories. Here is a link to one page in which the pictures add expression that is more than the words alone can give. http://www.floweringnose.com/art/batman-snow/issue-194/page-22/batman-legends-dark-knight-194-page-22<br /><br />More can be found in the gallery and blog on his website at www.floweringnose.com<br />Vickihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11195527278285894012noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-81357664275266607242014-03-06T12:32:15.287-05:002014-03-06T12:32:15.287-05:00>>(like David i don't share your enthusi...>>(like David i don't share your enthusiasm for Japanese comics. i've yet to see one that made me want to buy it).<br /><br />Obviously I can't make you buy something, but I think anyone who is suspicious of manga ought to read Katsuhiro Otomo's Domu (Chris James mentioned this guy two posts ago). Otomo is the guy who created the anime Akira, which is incredible if you haven't had the chance to see it. His "Domu" is, as far as I have seen, the greatest piece of comics ever created.<br /><br />Unfortunately, because of the sheer vast quantity of manga produced, and the unfortunate age demographics of manga in the US, we usually only get the garbage. But it's important to keep in mind that 64% of 20 somethings, 31% of 30 somethings, 24% of 40 somethings, and 10% of 50 somethings in Japan report reading manga on a regular basis. There is quite a lot of it aimed at older audiences that we don't easily get our hands on.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249577762409684046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-18673127317309318412014-03-06T12:28:43.707-05:002014-03-06T12:28:43.707-05:00Kev Ferrara and Laurence John-- re Toth, I agree t...Kev Ferrara and Laurence John-- re Toth, I agree that he was excellent and I think Laurence captures my own sense of why: "Toth was more interested in the language of visual storytelling than the message" and he was first rate. I also think Tith was absolutely right about the burnt matchstick. Kev confused me at first with his comment about the imaginative heights of Toth's storytelling, because (unlike Starr) Toth did very little writing as far as I am aware. If we are talking about visual storytelling, Kev and I will just have to disagree (notwithstanding his very thorough effort to second guess Starr's staging on the examples here). Starr's storytelling was more moderate, and conformed to the requirements of a strip that had to satisfy different formats in hundreds of newspapers. I like stories that shout (like Toth's) but I also like stories that purr or hum. David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-57541923791155046492014-03-06T09:44:21.161-05:002014-03-06T09:44:21.161-05:00Is this the last of your series on Starr? I hope t...Is this the last of your series on Starr? I hope there is more. He is my new favorite.<br /><br />JSLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-31465838451869647742014-03-06T09:06:20.643-05:002014-03-06T09:06:20.643-05:00Richard, there seems to be two questions being ask...Richard, there seems to be two questions being asked by David...<br /><br />1-why are certain comics critically acclaimed when they're mediocre in the drawing / storytelling dept. ?<br /><br />2-have comics -generally- lost the art of visual storytelling ?<br /><br /><br />just to recap my position:<br /><br /><br />1- i think they're critically acclaimed because either the content is deemed more highbrow and/ or the art ticks certain avant garde / modernist boxes.<br />i think in many, but not all cases, the drawing and storytelling isn't necessarily weaker, it's just being done differently (and there isn't just one bag of storytelling devices either).<br /><br />2- in most of the popular superhero genre stuff i'd say yes, but there's still lots of examples of excellent work out there. <br /><br />(like David i don't share your enthusiasm for Japanese comics. i've yet to see one that made me want to buy it).<br />Laurence Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11988700485839219253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-75460721586255711762014-03-05T14:53:03.081-05:002014-03-05T14:53:03.081-05:00Michael Stipe and Jeff Mangum of NMH are friends a...Michael Stipe and Jeff Mangum of NMH are friends actually, so there's probably something to that.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249577762409684046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-49585315255739075642014-03-05T14:45:59.437-05:002014-03-05T14:45:59.437-05:00Two headed boy with weights and pulleys
There'...<i>Two headed boy with weights and pulleys</i><br /><br /><a href="http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lf6vCjtaV1k&app=m" rel="nofollow">There's the problem</a>...people cluelessly live in a world of recycled culture tweaked to make them think it's fresh and hip.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-30801024845207383012014-03-05T14:08:10.284-05:002014-03-05T14:08:10.284-05:00I think it suggests something about the work that ...I think it suggests something about the work that has made it popular (outside of those artists who were just spent to the top of the charts), whether or not that specific quality is important to me is another story. To make a comparison with popular music, I by and large prefer music that is progressive, operatic, with a complexity of time signatures and unusual harmonies, but I understand that music today is primarily about the novelty of the hook and the production level, and I can take a far enough step back to see why those works are popular even if those aren't the primary criteria I look for in a musician.<br /><br /><br />In a discussion comparing the works of the past to the works of today it seems disingenuous to use as examples of today's work those comics which are specifically known to be unpopular outsider works who have followings consisting primarily of hipster academics.<br /><br />It would be like comparing Les Paul to <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCxEWPLDg5c&feature=kp" rel="nofollow">Neutral Milk Hotel</a>. Sure, there are some hipster academics today who will claim NMH is one of the greatest songwriters working today, but it's a relatively small group, and the public at large has no idea who he they are in spite of their being wildly popular amongst certain cultural elites and academics.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249577762409684046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-81016140322091703902014-03-05T13:24:33.611-05:002014-03-05T13:24:33.611-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249577762409684046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-86228280080624869342014-03-05T12:44:41.732-05:002014-03-05T12:44:41.732-05:00Richard,
do you think that sales figures say anyt...Richard, <br />do you think that sales figures say anything about the quality of a work ?Laurence Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11988700485839219253noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-83835103366742286612014-03-05T12:14:46.615-05:002014-03-05T12:14:46.615-05:00To again put out some figures to clarify just how ...To again put out some figures to clarify just how irrelevant these guys are, lets look at Harvey Pekar since hes supposed to be one of the big names according to the Art Historian hipsters --<br /><br />When his American Splendor Season Two came out in April 2008 it sold 7,000 issues. That puts it in the 202nd place for that month, behind such behemoths of illustration as... Uncle Sam & the Freedom Fighters, and Jenna Jameson's Shadow Hunter.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249577762409684046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-9824991475598593282014-03-05T11:58:47.745-05:002014-03-05T11:58:47.745-05:00>>>"I think illustration is in a pha...>>>"I think illustration is in a phase where we see all too closely what is low in man-- from R. Crumb and Harvey Pekar and Gilbert Shelton, etc, etc, through Panter and Ware and Brown."<br /><br /><br />David, I have to protest again, why is this how you're characterizing illustration today? <br /><br />These guys are nobodies except to the handful of art history hipsters who have been writing this progressivist post-modern history of comics and illustration.<br /><br />By and large the public doesn't care about these guys, other artists don't care about these guys, and publishers are not in any way looking for this sort of work, so who exactly are you criticizing here except the Yale Art History department?Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08249577762409684046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-81891132606040810552014-03-05T11:24:04.153-05:002014-03-05T11:24:04.153-05:00We are talking about visual storytelling here. Not...We are talking about visual storytelling here. Not story writing. Nor are we talking about drawing, necessarily. (Starr's drawing is professional and crisp throughout.)<br /><br />What I have seen of Starr's writing seems like a soap opera with a little bit of intrigue thrown in. Exactly like hollywood boilerplate of that era; an exotic locale, a pinch of Alfred Hitchcock and James Bond, a pretty actress or two, on-the-nose or clunky dialogue, a macguffin in the briefcase, a trusted ally betrayal, a peculiar-looking tough, the secret mission to the fortified embassy, a dark figure jumps out of the bushes, etc. And I don't mind that, because the real storytelling is how it is told with the visuals. Which is why the same story illustrated by Don Heck and Bill Sienkiewicz will be miles apart in terms of experience.<br /><br />So I am just talking about how Starr is creating and arranging his visual storytelling. And I find it, like his writing, stock. Functional, adequate, but uninspired. I don't think he actually believes the story he is telling. I think he is just constructing it from parts. The flow between panels is not being used very well, and his blocking is not adequate to his level of detail. If we were to break down the first two On Stage strips you've posted here, panel by panel, it would be a shredding. <br /><br />Just in the first one, the continuity between the first two panels completely takes me out of the story. The 180 degree rule (which is crucial) if not quite broken, is abused. The guy who just appears behind the hat-wearing character somehow ends up between the tree in the first panel and the hatted man, which means he must have done a bunny hop under the branch between the first and second panels, which is silly. The light that is casting the branch shadow onto the guy's head in the second panel would have lit front of the tree in the first panel. The blocking between the three characters in the first two panels is not established (why don't we see a little bit of the fallen man at the bottom right corner of the second panel, so we know he's still there. Or why don't we see a little bit of the surprising man in the first panel, along the right border) <br /><br />And then we cut away on the third panel to two more characters. Are they in the same jungle? Is that character in the background the same guy as the one that popped from behind the tree in the second panel? Because he went from looking Teutonic to looking Mexican. And why didn't the hatted man's gun fire if he was attacked? He surely would have had time while the attacker was saying his dumb action-movie line.<br /><br />And that line "You're right to look alarmed, my friend. You're looking at very bad news indeed," really needs just the hint of a raised fist to accompany it for someone new to the strip. Otherwise it takes several minutes to discover what has happened between panel two and three, particularly as the attacker looks different from panel to panel. <br /><br />And does anybody really think in sentences like, "...Is the wallet the reason for this evacuation? It worried Volkov, all right, but... there he is! Outside the gate!!" (This is classic expository writing. And, as Chas Palminteri says to John Cusack in Bullets Over Broadway "You don't write like people talk.")<br /><br />Lastly, the big action scene in the colored sunday reads in terms of the animation of the forms between panels, but the fellow is running to the right of the tree in panel 3 and jumps on a branch to the left of it. A branch that would probably not hold him. And doing a maneuver that cannot be done in one swing. And over a wall that must have no thickness to it whatsoever for him to make the move he does all in one effort. The wall is as thin as the newsprint it is printed on. Again, I think Starr is constructing all of this stuff from cliches and doesn't believe any of it in his heart, so all these continuity problems are happening. Maybe he never climbed trees or walls as a kid. <br /><br />kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-82809675699578935252014-03-05T11:03:54.686-05:002014-03-05T11:03:54.686-05:00David,
don't forget that there was cynicism ...David, <br /><br />don't forget that there was cynicism around in the 40s and 50s too; film noir and the beat writers for example. the idealised imagery of that period was just the sunny side of things. <br /><br />we still have those idealised images of a 'perfect' life all around us; in advertising imagery of beautiful young people in designer clothes. of people in expensive cars and with the latest luxury goods. they're really the modern equivalent of those 1950s 'perfect nuclear family' images; we know they're fake but we still want to believe in the fantasy anyway. nothing's changed really.<br /><br />as for art i think it's part of the job of the artist to see behind the facade. art that doesn't do that - art which basically serves a 'feel good' function or which just creates images of a human utopia - descends into kitsch or propaganda art. <br /><br />i'm not suggesting that art needs to be all "isn't everything doomed and pointless", but that it requires a certain objectivity on the part of the artist to create something more clear sighted. Laurence Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11988700485839219253noreply@blogger.com