The Minds of Monsters
Thinking about That Which Redeems also left me thinking about The Minds of Monsters, a recent interlude in The Wotch. Like Sluggy, the Wotch has both wacky hijinks and epic storylines. This little story arc in particular had at least one ‘monster’ that reminded me of a similar character from That Which Redeems.
The conflict – especially internal – between dark and light is something I’ve been grooving on quite a bit of late. In any great tale of good and evil, well-designed villains can make or break the story. It is the reason I was so enthused about The Sundering. It is the reason I enjoyed Night Watch, a intriguing movie I saw the other day. It is the reason why I suddenly have much more appreciation for one of the characters recently discussed in Dominic Deegan. It is similarly one of the reasons why I’ve been completely unimpressed with the evil empire in GPF.
It isn’t that a villain has to be conflicted in order to be interesting. Maniacal dictators can work well, especially in the right setting. There can certainly be a bad guy who really is just out to gain power. Or to get revenge. Or to kill stuff just because he can.
But any villain you want readers to be interested in needs to be tuned beyond the surface alone. That is why so many conflicted characters are so engaging – instant conflict equals instant interest. And even for the characters that are fully evil, it becomes a lot harder to simply hate them if we have a glimpse of understanding for why they do the things they do.
It can be funny to just have a hate-on for a foe, sure. But with a villain that I can understand and even empathize with… well, it is a lot easier to get drawn into the story. Even if you know that, irregardless, the bad guy will lose in the end… there may be a tiny part, deep inside, hoping it doesn’t turn out that way.
The Minds of Monsters does a good job of giving some of those insights, and covers its share of villains – from the ones we can feel free to hate, to the ones we are rooting for deep inside. With all the silliness that goes on in The Wotch, it can be easy to overlook the more serious elements going on in the background. But they are definitely there, and definitely done well.
Once More into the Sluggyverse
So, another week begins.
Sluggy Freelance has concluded Oceans Unmoving, ending the tale on a cliffhanger that left many of its former haters (myself included) wanting more. The story started weak but ended strong. Now it is left behind regardless, and the normal cast and crew are back in the picture. Will things return to that which we know and love? It’s Sluggy Freelance, man. I’ve got faith.
In response to this event, I decided to treat myself to reading back through That Which Redeems, which is easily one of my favorite storylines in webcomicdom.
I’ve heard on more than one occasion people lamenting Oceans Unmoving, and discussing a desire for the good old days where Sluggy was just zany adventures and silliness.
And those may have been the good old days – but Sluggy’s greatest triumphs haven’t just been its crazy humor, but its epic tales. The Bug, The Witch and the Robot. Fire and Rain. That Which Redeems.
These are the areas where Abram’s art shines through. Where we really see the potential of his characters. And, sure, its full of the jokes and the puns and all the other funny stuff that keeps it Sluggy, and that is part of what makes it great.
It’s hard to read back through any of the great Sluggy stories and not have high hopes for the future of Sluggy.
Spirited ‘Discussion’
There you are, in the middle of an argument.
Both sides have a point. Standing between them you can see -oh so clearly- the middle line.
And you have the words. The perfect, perfect words. That will make it all better. That will fix it all. Words that need to be said, because they are exactly what the people arguing need to hear.
And so you have your say, because there is some optimism hovering deep within you that knows that people are rational, thinking beings, and will take your words to heart.
And man does it blow up in your face.
I can’t enumerate the number of times I’ve felt like this. Where I’ve either tried to help, or known that trying to help will only make things worse, because most of the time? People just don’t want to list.
It might still be worth it. Your words may stick with them. Your message might get through… eventually, and you might have done them a grand service.
But having to wade through the fire and brimstone that comes before then is a hard path to take.
I applaud the dude for taking that path, and I applaud Anywhere but Here for capturing that sentiment perfectly.
It is a stellar comic all around, even if it does stray into some pretty crazy levels. And right now it is doing its thing, and doing it well.
What makes webcomics unique – the real deal, part 3
It may seem like an ironic time to discuss this element of the webcomic world, but in many ways the recent events have only underscored my beliefs regarding this subject.
Community
All areas of media and entertainment attract their share of fans, admirers, and commentators, both professional and amateur. Book review clubs form in libraries. Conventions are held the world over. Students analyze and discuss everything from poetry to graphic novels.
Many of those discussions find their place on the internet as well, in forums, websites, and the like.
So what is it about the webcomic community that stands out?
Personally, I’d say it is the interaction between creators and readers, as compared to all those other fields.
There are many amateur comics on the web. Many of those, nonetheless, find themselves with a following and a degree of influence. Similarly, there are numerous webcomic review blogs that enter the field without credentials or connections – just ordinary folks having their say on the topics.
Many of the webcomics that rise to ‘fame’ do not have authors that are rolling in piles of dough. They have respect and make a living doing what they like – that simple goal is the aspiration of most of those in the field.
The people making these comics often have their own forums and emails where they will chat with their readers. Some of them will include nods to others in the community, or to their own fans. Many of those forum boards develop their own nature, and the fans of one comic or another might even get a nickname for being part of that following.
And yet, despite the connection – despite the fact that many of those authors are ordinary Joes (and Janes!) – a lot of them do have significant ‘power’, at least in the form of their hordes of fans.
There is a degree of interactivity among all these areas, in the weight the readership has on the creators, the creators have with the readership, and the various creators have between each other. There is no test or trial to move from one area to another, and anyone can publish their own webcomic, regardless of quality.
And yes, in some ways that means there is a lot of amateur elements out there. And favoritism, and, of course, drama.
But in most such communities built up around elements of entertainment, the community is formed entirely of the fans. Movie stars don’t hang out with their adoring public, they wave to them from afar.
In webcomics, the creators and the fans not only interact, but in some places, the line between the two can blur entirely. That’s a valuable thing. That’s pretty damn unique.
They visit each others sites. They give advice, and sometimes band together to face the forces of evil. Some stay independant, others work together. They talk with their readership, and sometimes rightfully tell the people ‘advising’ them to shut the hell up – and sometimes they see inspired comments and take them to heart, and one reader’s words might result in a flourishing change in the comic.
And of course, the community has drama. With the ability to toss out so many opinions, and have so much response between parties almost immediately, with so many outside folks weighing in on the subject, of course drama rears its ugly head. But it passes as quickly as it springs up, most of the time, and quickly enough becomes just a matter of history.
Look at the latest drama, regarding the “History of Webcomics.” Most of the hubbub has died down. Aside from the odd late-arriving anonymous poster over at T’s blog, the discussion there has turned to matters of looove. The thread over at Websnark has degenerated into webcartoonist slashfic. The hurricane has passed, and everyone is back to their normal depraved behavior.
T has posted his offer to take final comments and advice on his work. It will still be produced, and maybe some of the issues people have with it will be removed. So, a day of drama, and the result being something that may actually be… handy.
Now, that isn’t to say the entire thing couldn’t have be handled better – how much better would things have been without the insults and flames and rhetoric, and just the rational questions and concerns? That would have been just fine and dandy with me.
But in the end, the fact that even though we might be stuck with one, we still have access to the other, is inspiring. I like the fact that there are people in the community that can look at the situation and simply be reasonable about it. I can listen to them, and I can ignore the others.
There are a lot of things that make webcomics unique. I’m sure plenty of others could come up with answers beyond the five I’ve talked about, as well as go more in depth into these topics.
Each of these areas has the potential both for good and for bad. The ability to experiment with infinite canvas yields both impressive successes and awe-inspiring crap. The ability to self publish yields edgy, wicked humor as well as sketchy, illegible typos. The ability to communicate at the speed of the interweb yields both constructive discussion and degenerative rambling.
But I’ll take the good with the bad. Given how webcomics are doing these days compared to when they started, and the pace they are going at… I’ve got this funny feeling that other folks may feel the same.
What makes webcomics unique – the real deal, part 2
Alrighty, time to get back to the discussion of webcomics themselves, and continue talking about some of the things that webcomics have to offer, both to their creators and the adoring public.
Freedom
Webcomic artists, by and large, do not have editors.
They may solicit advice from their friends or family, maybe have them review a strip before it goes live. They might have a creative partner, and be part of a writer/artist team that checks things over together before posting them.
But they rarely have someone whose job is it to stand there and tell them: “That strip is crap. Throw it out.”
They don’t have someone to correct typos and other basic mistakes.
And they don’t have someone there to tell them what is, and is not, proper material for discussing in one’s comic.
There are two real results of this.
One is that the quality of strips isn’t always consistent. Typos and mistakes can be tossed out there. They can, of course, be fixed after the fact, though not all artists bother doing so. But there isn’t always a quality control, even on the best of strips.
But nothing is funny or perfect 100% of the time, and if the comics we find in our newspaper are an example of what editors think is quality humor, I’m content to take webcomics instead.
Which brings us to the other big impact of the self-publishing nature of webcomics – freedom of material.
Webcomics can be made about anything. With some strips, you might have a warning right up front about where the comic will go. Others might start off light, and abruptly descend into death and tragedy and premarital hanky panky, to the consternation of those who were expecting a ‘G’ rated comic.
But in the end, those comics don’t have ratings. They are the product of the author, and they alone determine the direction the comics go. And with the ability to not have to satisfy constrained limitations, out of fear of offending the public… comes unexpected quality.
There are more than a few webcomics that sport a wicked, dark humor than many people appreciate. I like having access to that. There are webcomics that are just used to promote people’s personal agenda, or spout off their latest barb at their foes. I like that less – but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there, or isn’t the right of the artist to do so.
Because by and large, in the end, the comics being produced on the web? (And here is an important statement, so don’t miss it.)
They are being produced for the artists themselves.
Oh, this isn’t to say that there aren’t artists out there for the money, or that they don’t want to have people actually enjoy and discuss their comic. But while there may be a number of comics that make money now, they didn’t start out like that.
Most webcomics started out as a hobby. As a chance – an opportunity – for the artists to get their work out. Tell their story, do their thing. 99% of the comics on the web remain as such, and even as there are more every year that turn a profit, they are turning a profit for the creators, who are finally getting to do what they love, and make a living off of it. Without limitations, without having to worry about pushing the line. Some comics practically live off of that sort of independance.
Comic books and newspaper strips often change property. DC produces Batman – and while there might be a team working on it for a while, it is never theirs.
Webcomics belong to their creators. They might be forced to change hosting services because of content, but they can still find a home. They might have to deal with lawsuits because of what they say, but they can often weather it. They might have to face drama for the things they say or do, but that is just part of life on the internet.
The ability to own their own strip, and have it take on the life that they alone choose to give it? Priceless.
Format
Yes, it has to be mentioned – the wonderful world of infinite canvas.
The power of the internet is the power of a medium without the standard limitations of pen and paper.
Many popular strips, of course, follow a standard model – several panels in a row. Clean, consistent art.
Others may follow more of a comic book format, producing full pages at a time where the action may require large or small panels as the scene determines.
And others choose to make use of the wonderful things that can only be done with webcomics.
So. Infinite Canvas is obviously a good thing. You can do all the things you can do without it, and you can do a bunch of other nifty stuff too – though that stuff may very well not be easily publishable.
In many ways, infinite canvas is a double-edged sword. The web allows for some amazing creations, but at the same time, has the potential for shoddy browsing interfaces. For unnecessary flash and dazzle. Some webcomic layouts are inspired – others, just confusing.
What is important, though, is that it is a new medium. It is something that gives access to devices unavailable outside the digital world.
Whether it is used for good or for evil, for artistic experimentation or annoying flashing lights, its presence is significant, and the subject of a sizable amount of discussion.
Tune in tomorrow for the stunning conclusion to this epic journey through the fascinating world of webcomics!
…
Alright, crazy mode off. I’ve got one more element that I think is the most important yet, and I’ll be wrapping things up tomorrow with my thoughts on that.
We Interrupt This Daily Blog for Breaking News in Webcomics Drama!
While I’ve still got a few more thoughts to finish up on the nature of webcomics, I thought I would give my opinions on the latest controversy in webcomics drama.
T Campbell, webcomics aficionado, has been an important figure in the webcomics industry. He has produced numerous comics, some more notable than others. He has also had a variety of pet projects, seemingly always trying to expand the technology available to the field. He has collaborated with many other comic artists and authors, served as editor of Graphic Smash, and in general, been doing everything he can to help make better comics, and help make comics better.
His latest work is possibly one of the most important to date – the History of Webcomics. A book that will, presumably, attempt to cover the important people and events in webcomics history. A relative brief history, admittedly – but time moves quickly on the internet, and there are surely events and change enough to discuss.
The latest controversy involves the two creators of Megatokyo, and their breakup as a creative writing team, and what the facts are behind the matter.
Now, I haven’t actually read the book. I haven’t actually seen what it says, so I can’t say, for myself, exactly how well it covers the situation. Scott Kurtz and Rodney Caston and T have all said their pieces about exactly what is going on.
Essentially, the dispute at hand is that T compiled much of his information from impersonal fact finding – reading websites, observing dialogue, and so forth. He had some interviews – but many important people (such as Rodney, the ‘forgotten’ member of the Megatokyo team), were not contacted or consulted. The question at hand is, in short – how valid will his book be as a history?
Now, I can understand that interviews could become too much. When you are attempting to chronicle the history of thousands of webcomics, I can see far too great a difficulty in trying to interview every single person involved.
But part of T’s explanation is that he came to distrust the interview process itself. He had to deal with too much ‘spin’ – too many people trying to put themselves in their best light. And admittedly, that is one of the hard things about an interview – it is getting one person’s opinion alone, and only one side of the story.
However… that is no different, in my opinion, than any other source of information T could use. Blogs and newsboxes and comics and rants – every single one of those will be just as full of ‘propaganda.’
Typed words are not somehow exempt from inaccuracies. Typed words do not ordain the utter truth. In many ways, written word is often more likely to be part of putting one’s ‘best face forward.’
There are no unbiased sources, and part of the work of assembling a collection of facts about the situation is compiling as many different sources as possible in order to see the bigger picture.
Which is possible, in theory, with or without interviews.
But when Scott describes what he has seen of the book – such as chapter 3, which covers the seven most important people in the creation of the industry… there seem to be a few names that are missing. Some names are weighted more than others. And the question arises – in light of the lack of consultation with certain involved entitied, how much of the information the book contains is influenced by the bias and perspective of the author himself?
And the answer is, well, all of it. Duh. He is writing the book. It’s impossible, in many ways, for an author to distance themselves one hundred percent from what they write. Every history book ever has been similarly influenced.
However – that does not mean that they shouldn’t try. That doesn’t mean they should not seek out every single possible bit of information to try and get, if not an accurate picture on things, at least as accurate as perspective as possible.
And in my mind, failing to even contact ‘Largo‘ demonstrates a break down in his research. When dealing with how the split between Rodney and Fred occured, just looking at the seperate descriptions on their respective sites shows me distinct omissions and different portrayals of what happened. The truth is no doubt somewhere between the two – yet it strikes me as difficult to really find the heart of the matter without digging a bit deeper than the surface.
Is this an area that should be pursued, of importance enough to the “History of Webcomics” to merit fact-finding? It is hard to say. But when one of the creators of one of the most successful webcomic strips is left out as an influential figure in the early days of webcomics, it does leave me questioning exactly what spin on things the work is taking – and what other such ommissions may exist.
I agree with a lot of the things that Kurtz says in his rant – there seem to be views in the book that I won’t agree with. And I can’t say for sure until I truly read the book – and I can’t fault T for having his own opinions – but that worry is there.
Of course, I think Kurtz, as usual, comes off way to strong, running out with both guns blazing at the slightest alarm. He accuses T of just trying to ride the webcomics world to fame and fortune, an accusation as ludicrous as it gets. He accuses T of various deceptive information in the advertisement for the book – but in the end, thats the nature of advertising. Were there significant mistakes made with that ad? Well, yes. Not seeking permission, hyping inaccurate facts – definite mistakes.
But ones that T recognized and apologized for as soon as they were pointed out to him. I don’t think he actively thought that it would be easier to seek forgiveness than permission – I don’t think it even occured to him. I think it was overlooked in his eagerness to finish creating this project that he has invested so much in.
T Campbell has always struck me as desperate – as eager – to do all he can for webcomic world. On a lot of counts, he has succeeded. He has accomplished some amazing things. He has an intense dedication to the industry – not to his works in the field, but to the industry as a whole. That is more than could be said for many, many people out there.
I don’t think he would ever intentionally go out of his way to harm another in the field by his actions – but sometimes carelessness can be as great a danger.
He has talked about his greatest fear – to one day discover that he has misplaced his principles without even noticing. One of these goals – to give credit where credit is due.
Did he fail here? Again, I can’t say for sure until I’ve read the book.
But the fact that this discussion has even come up bodes poorly. There will be a taint on his work from this – from worries over how valid it is, how accurate. From those who wonder how they may have been misrepresented without consultation. From those who disagree with the views T shares in his book, and the methods he used to research them.
For myself, I think that the book will be filled with a lot of good information. I suspect it will be valuable resource for a lot of people, and that the goal of the work – to help people – will be met.
But again – from the discussion thus far, it does seem as though the work will not be as complete as it could have been. Which is a shame – though, in my opinion, a forgivable one… at least by myself. But I’m just a student of the field, not one of those directly harmed.
The book is already in its final stages. I don’t suspect much could be changed at this point, so whatever damage may have been done… is done.
When explaining his greatest fear, T made a request of his friends – to tell him when he has made a mistake.
Now, I can’t lay claim to being his friend, or anything more than a concerned outsider. I’ve met him once, at a con, when I was just another fan, and that has been the extent of my contact with him.
But I do want to give him my thoughts. I think a mistake was made in not seeking out more direct consulation with those discussed in the book. With not, at least, giving them the chance to give their perspective on the words written about them.
I don’t think it will be a fatal mistake. I don’t think the industry will abandon T because of this. I suspect he will have as many on his side as not… and that, eventually, the drama will die down, and be, for the most part, forgotten. Some friends may now be merely associates, but others will stay true, and T will still remain one of the prominent figures in the community. The book itself will succeed, by and large, and be treated by many as the resource it was meant to be.
But I still feel a mistake was made. And if nothing else, an apology is due to those wronged.
What makes webcomics unique – the real deal, part 1
What do webcomics have to offer that makes them unique?
A lot of others have talked about this topic, and given their own answers. There are those who have written entire books that no doubt answer that question. It is something almost every webcomic review likely at least thinks about – what makes this field special? I know these comics are cool, and innovative, and I like them… but why?
Well, I can’t promise I’ll be able to give the perfect reply to all that – but I’ve thought about it myself, and there are definitely reasons that come to mind.
Immediacy
Novels are written seasons to years to decades in advance of when they may actually see the light of day. Comic books are put together months before they are actually released. Even daily comic strips in the paper are often stockpiled weeks in advance.
These delays give time for them to be edited, and ensure they are on hand to meet deadlines, and to go through the process of being published. They aren’t just tradition – in many ways, they are a necessary part of the procedure, and just one of the limitations enforced by working in that medium
On the internet, the deadlines that exist are self-enforced. The process of creating a webcomic strip may be a day’s work, or it may be something briefer. But the process of publishing it often involves no more than pushing several buttons.
That is not to say it is an easy and flawless procedure, as many webcomic authors could no doubt attest after their fair share of technical difficulty.
But it is a set-up that allows webcomics to be updated on a daily basis, often with strips drawn that very day.
This gives the authors a powerful amount of ability to respond to the present. To respond to other webcomics that might give them a cameo, and tip their hat with their own such nod the very next day. Or to give commentary on current events even as they occur. Or to respond to any other concerns that they choose – to change a planned comic for something new, something immediate.
Even those comics with month-long buffers can do this. They aren’t bound to a schedule – they can adjust as they see fit, and adapt, and change.
In the middle of a story, and it just isn’t working out? They can pull the plug and drop it entirely. Or make the alterations that the readership seems to be desiring. And yes, they can even stick to their guns and do it their own way – but they don’t have to.
When a comic book is published, its done. Complete. If the story has some horrible flaw in the beginning, its likely that flaw will stick around until the end.
Webcomics are constantly in motion. It is, in many ways, a power granted by the medium – the internet. But it puts them in an entirely different world than published comics, which have a time-delay with even the simplest works.
This is one of the biggest reasons that the webcomic world is, in many ways, a living organism – like everything else on the internet, time moves quickly. It is one of the reasons why it is so easy to partake in webcomics discussion – there is so much information constantly being presented, and all of it is based in the now.
Accessibility
This is another area I’ve discussed before – the accessibility of webcomics.
First off – by and large, webcomics are free of charge. Bam! End of story – you want to take a look, feel free.
Obviously this gives them a larger audience – namely, the audience of people who will gladly enjoy free entertainment. On the internet, thats a lot of folks.
But it also makes it so much easier to share webcomics.
I have a roommate who is a math teacher. I see a clever math joke in a strip. In under a minute, I can send him a link.
He doesn’t have to be an avid webcomic reader. He doesn’t have to have time to consume the entire archives of a comic. He doesn’t need anything more than a few minutes online checking his mail, and bam! Free humor.
Now suppose that it was a comic strip in the newspaper I saw. Well, easy enough – I could clip it out and show it to him.
But what about friends who aren’t nearby? Well, I suppose I could… clip it out and… mail it to them?
Seems like such a bulky process, with the internet around.
What about a good book? I read a book I like, I can recommend it to friends, and hope they go out and hunt it down. Maybe shell out some cash if they can’t find it in the local library. I can lend it to those I see, though only one at a time.
If I see a good webcomic? Bam! Instant linkage.
This is especially handy for webcomics criticism. If I want to review a book, or movie, or television show, most of what I say will be lost on anyone who hasn’t seen it, unless I spend an inordinate amount of time setting up the background.
Even if they have seen it, they might not remember details closely enough to really get what I’m talking about.
With webcomics, I can link straight to what I am talking about – and if someone hasn’t already read it? They can check it out directly – even if only a few strips to catch them up on the basics, or to refresh it in their mind – and then go see what I’m saying. And if I’m saying something really complicated, discussing story arcs from year one of this comic, and year four of that comic, and so forth? I can link straight to each little obscure arc without difficulty.
Whereas if I start reviewing the full works of Robert Jordan, it might take readers a good bit of digging around to find my references.
Free stuff, immediately available. That can make a world of difference – both in bringing in new readers, and in being able to review the field.
Even outside of anything else – it makes webcomics convenient. It makes them easy. They can be browsed by someone with only a few minutes of time, or someone with hours to burn.
And for a medium that is, at its heart, about entertainment – thats handy.
-To Be Continued-
A good bit more to come, later tonight or tomorrow…
Damn Good Comics 