It's generally not a good idea to try to promote any medium you're looking at critically—people wonder where your information's really coming from, your trustworthiness becomes anyone's guess, all these lines get crossed, and suddenly you have an incredibly entertaining but utter bullshit Fox News-like situation on your hands. Unless you're Comics Comics, and then you're golden. A three-man operation that started a couple years ago to zoom a 20/20 eye on the whole wide world of comics, they synthesize what they find into smart texts and heap some more comics on top of it, print it all up, and serve it to you on the cheap. They also have a relentless blog. How do they not get tired of nonstop comics? A couple days ago we promised you an interview with them, and here it is.Vice: You guys know everything. How is this? How do you know everyone? Do you ever see daylight or do you have like scurvy from Vitamin K deficiency?
Frank Santoro: Among the three of us we do know about a lot of obscure, almost esoteric comics. I learned everything from Bill Boichel of Copacetic Comics in Pittsburgh. And then from Dan Nadel [who is also a part of Comics Comics -Ed.] and Mark Newgarden. They all have incredible libraries and I would just soak it up like a sponge. I don't actually read all the comics I study. I'm mainly interested in their construction, their "outsider art" quality, and how it all relates to avant-garde 20th Century American Art (as pretentious as that sounds).
Tim Hodler: One of the advantages of having three different people writing is that it makes it look like you each know more than you actually do. And really, it isn't that hard to become an expert on anything if you waste enough of your life paying attention to it.How would you categorize the kinds of things you like? It all seems enormous and endless, but I bet it's one of those things where once you're in it everything is linked and feels very small.
One of the main animating ideas of Comics Comics is that all kinds of comics have good things about them (and bad). All three of us like superhero stuff, old newspaper strips like Popeye and Krazy Kat, crime comic books, highfalutin "art" comics like the stuff in Kramer's Ergot, etc. I could go on and on. There is a tremendous range of different kinds of stories and approaches in comics, but that's a big part of what makes it interesting. Categorizing can be fun, but it's more fun just to separate between comics you like or appreciate and comics you don't.
Frank: I like everything. Really. Categories? Maybe by artists, by styles, like Painting. The new Ivan Brunetti anthology (Graphic Fiction vol. 2) does a great job categorizing works by styles and subject.Wanna give us some juicy inside gossip about comics artists?
Well, mainstream comics artists all mostly think drawing from photographs is the way to go. Many of them literally dress themselves up and take photos of themselves in poses and then add the costumes to the drawing, hell, sometimes they even have the costumes on when taking the photos! (insert Family Feud voice: Survey says?! Errrrt! Sorry, mate!)How do you know when something's good? Have you ever raved about someone and then were like, "Oh I take it back"?
I did that once. Promoted something I wasn't too sure about. But I can't take it back (i.e., erase the blog post I mean) simply because my tastes changed. I just stopped writing about that comic and making references to it. Tim called me on it. Keeps reminding me about it. What was the comic? Can't say. Nowadays, I let something "sit" with me for awhile before I write about it.
Tim: You know if something's good if you can read it a second time and still enjoy it and find new things in it you didn't notice before. You know it's great if you can keep doing that forever.How'd you start Comics Comics? And why? A lot of the people you include in the actual book you can find in other places.
Frank: Me and Dan had a drunken weekend over Christmas in 2005 and decided to do a comics mag "for us, for all the dumb, retarded comics we love and that no one writes about." Tim shaped it all up into a real magazine and had the foresight to start the blog, where it's really taken off.
Tim: Frank's right, though I think our original publisher, Laris Kreslins (Dan publishes us now, through PictureBox), is the one who actually had the idea to start a blog, as a promotional kind of thing. Now the blog is more widely read than the print magazine, which is kind of weird.Tim, you married a comics artist. You're officially a lifer.
Just because Lauren [Weinstein] keeps making comics doesn't mean I have to keep writing about them. At least I hope it doesn't mean that.Oh, OK then. What happened to turn comix around again? Or has it? Is this notion of a "revolution" stale, or just impossible?
Frank: I think it has just become another "acceptable" form of expression. Personally, I'm against comics gaining respectability. That's always THE END. Look at Film. Everyone is a Filmmaker now with a capital F. No one just makes a fucking movie for a laugh. Think John Waters. As soon as he became co-opted by Hollywood his movies—while brilliant by mainstream standards—went south in my view. Same with Art, same with Comics. The avant-garde is generally at its best when it's making fun of the establishment and a lot of "alt comix" guys who used to make fun of the "establishment" in Comics are becoming the establishment.
Tim: There have always been lots of great comics worth paying attention to, but after RAW and MAUS there were great comics that specifically tackled the kind of subject matter (Holocaust memoirs, bourgeois alienation) in a "sophisticated" enough way that newspaper book reviews felt okay about praising them without looking declassé. Many really teriffic comics that don't fit that establishment mold are still ignored by the mainstream, and that will probably never change. Though once the newspaper and book industries collapse forever and people forget how to read, comics will probably still be around, at least if Fahrenheit 451 was right. I don't really agree with Frank's answer, by the way. Or at least I'm not too worried about it, even if he's right. There will always be comics that aren't "acceptable."So you would rather not even think about this shit and just focus on the drawrings?
Yes. We don't really write or worry about that kind of thing (Won't everyone realize how great comics are and validate our taste?), because it isn't really that interesting. Who cares what most people think, anyway?
Frank: Yes, but it's difficult because most cartoonists balk at discussing their Art in a manner similar to Art or Film criticism. Many of them cannot (or refuse to) think, talk, or write in a way that would dissect their work and bring new readings to light.Do you ever get sick of comics? Ever wish you could care about photography or something
I hate photography as art. Yuck. Andreas Gursky? Half a million bucks for that photograph? I used to work for his gallery and that always made me laugh.
Tim: Who says all we care about is comics? A million other people put out magazines about movies, music, photography, food, and literature, though. Almost no one with any brains writes about comic books. That's another reason we look like we know so much: most people who're into comics are idiots.Touché.MICKI DEBORGES
Advertisement
Frank Santoro: Among the three of us we do know about a lot of obscure, almost esoteric comics. I learned everything from Bill Boichel of Copacetic Comics in Pittsburgh. And then from Dan Nadel [who is also a part of Comics Comics -Ed.] and Mark Newgarden. They all have incredible libraries and I would just soak it up like a sponge. I don't actually read all the comics I study. I'm mainly interested in their construction, their "outsider art" quality, and how it all relates to avant-garde 20th Century American Art (as pretentious as that sounds).
Tim Hodler: One of the advantages of having three different people writing is that it makes it look like you each know more than you actually do. And really, it isn't that hard to become an expert on anything if you waste enough of your life paying attention to it.How would you categorize the kinds of things you like? It all seems enormous and endless, but I bet it's one of those things where once you're in it everything is linked and feels very small.
One of the main animating ideas of Comics Comics is that all kinds of comics have good things about them (and bad). All three of us like superhero stuff, old newspaper strips like Popeye and Krazy Kat, crime comic books, highfalutin "art" comics like the stuff in Kramer's Ergot, etc. I could go on and on. There is a tremendous range of different kinds of stories and approaches in comics, but that's a big part of what makes it interesting. Categorizing can be fun, but it's more fun just to separate between comics you like or appreciate and comics you don't.
Frank: I like everything. Really. Categories? Maybe by artists, by styles, like Painting. The new Ivan Brunetti anthology (Graphic Fiction vol. 2) does a great job categorizing works by styles and subject.
Advertisement
Well, mainstream comics artists all mostly think drawing from photographs is the way to go. Many of them literally dress themselves up and take photos of themselves in poses and then add the costumes to the drawing, hell, sometimes they even have the costumes on when taking the photos! (insert Family Feud voice: Survey says?! Errrrt! Sorry, mate!)How do you know when something's good? Have you ever raved about someone and then were like, "Oh I take it back"?
I did that once. Promoted something I wasn't too sure about. But I can't take it back (i.e., erase the blog post I mean) simply because my tastes changed. I just stopped writing about that comic and making references to it. Tim called me on it. Keeps reminding me about it. What was the comic? Can't say. Nowadays, I let something "sit" with me for awhile before I write about it.
Tim: You know if something's good if you can read it a second time and still enjoy it and find new things in it you didn't notice before. You know it's great if you can keep doing that forever.How'd you start Comics Comics? And why? A lot of the people you include in the actual book you can find in other places.
Frank: Me and Dan had a drunken weekend over Christmas in 2005 and decided to do a comics mag "for us, for all the dumb, retarded comics we love and that no one writes about." Tim shaped it all up into a real magazine and had the foresight to start the blog, where it's really taken off.
Tim: Frank's right, though I think our original publisher, Laris Kreslins (Dan publishes us now, through PictureBox), is the one who actually had the idea to start a blog, as a promotional kind of thing. Now the blog is more widely read than the print magazine, which is kind of weird.
Advertisement
Just because Lauren [Weinstein] keeps making comics doesn't mean I have to keep writing about them. At least I hope it doesn't mean that.Oh, OK then. What happened to turn comix around again? Or has it? Is this notion of a "revolution" stale, or just impossible?
Frank: I think it has just become another "acceptable" form of expression. Personally, I'm against comics gaining respectability. That's always THE END. Look at Film. Everyone is a Filmmaker now with a capital F. No one just makes a fucking movie for a laugh. Think John Waters. As soon as he became co-opted by Hollywood his movies—while brilliant by mainstream standards—went south in my view. Same with Art, same with Comics. The avant-garde is generally at its best when it's making fun of the establishment and a lot of "alt comix" guys who used to make fun of the "establishment" in Comics are becoming the establishment.
Tim: There have always been lots of great comics worth paying attention to, but after RAW and MAUS there were great comics that specifically tackled the kind of subject matter (Holocaust memoirs, bourgeois alienation) in a "sophisticated" enough way that newspaper book reviews felt okay about praising them without looking declassé. Many really teriffic comics that don't fit that establishment mold are still ignored by the mainstream, and that will probably never change. Though once the newspaper and book industries collapse forever and people forget how to read, comics will probably still be around, at least if Fahrenheit 451 was right. I don't really agree with Frank's answer, by the way. Or at least I'm not too worried about it, even if he's right. There will always be comics that aren't "acceptable."So you would rather not even think about this shit and just focus on the drawrings?
Yes. We don't really write or worry about that kind of thing (Won't everyone realize how great comics are and validate our taste?), because it isn't really that interesting. Who cares what most people think, anyway?
Frank: Yes, but it's difficult because most cartoonists balk at discussing their Art in a manner similar to Art or Film criticism. Many of them cannot (or refuse to) think, talk, or write in a way that would dissect their work and bring new readings to light.Do you ever get sick of comics? Ever wish you could care about photography or something
I hate photography as art. Yuck. Andreas Gursky? Half a million bucks for that photograph? I used to work for his gallery and that always made me laugh.
Tim: Who says all we care about is comics? A million other people put out magazines about movies, music, photography, food, and literature, though. Almost no one with any brains writes about comic books. That's another reason we look like we know so much: most people who're into comics are idiots.Touché.MICKI DEBORGES