Here are this week's links to what I've had published recently...
I missed this a couple weeks ago, but Dilbert creator Scott Adams is looking to take about a month off to work on some other projects, so he's put on a call to see if anyone would be interested in doing guest strips during that period. He states early on that it would be a paid gig, so he's not trying to pull a "for exposure" line of bullshit or anything, which is cool.
But then his request gets... uncomfortable. He starts by saying that he's looking to showcase some other perspectives...
But the "see if it sticks" part rings pretty false to me. I mean, he's offering people a week-long gig on the strip. Even if you dropped the entire current cast of Dilbert for the whole week to focus on the more diverse cast you were trying to ham-fistedly insert into Dilbert, a week's not enough time to "see if it sticks." That's one of the reasons why syndicates have aspiring cartoonists submit at least TWO weeks of strips to even be considered for anything. And, hell, one of the last big "hits" of strips, Pearls Before Swine, ran exclusively online for a full year before it was felt that there was enough support to put it into print! Does Adams really think fans of what Dilbert has been for the past quarter century will suddenly rave about a new and totally different type of character that's suddenly dropped in for a week?
Adams continues...
So what Adams is saying here is that he's not allowed to present any minority characters because he's white? And that the only way for a minority character to be funny is if they rely on existing stereotypes?
Look, I know the newspaper funnies aren't exactly a sea of diversity representation, either on the page or off. But haven't other white creators done just fine adding minority characters WITHOUT resorting to stereotypes? Franklin in Peanuts; Lt. Flap in Beetle Bailey; Oliver in Bloom County; Marcus, Phoebe and Eugene in FoxTrot; Lawrence in For Better or Worse; Caulfield in Frazz... It's not as long a list as it should be, certainly, but my point is that being a cishetero white person doesn't mean you can't introduce non-cishetero white characters and it doesn't mean that you have to rely on bad stereotypes.
And I think that seems to be the thing that Adams has failed to grasp when people criticize the "generic white guy" approach he has with Dilbert. The absence of diversity in his strip is a problem only in part because he doesn't even think about representing a broader population; the more significant problem is that when he IS forced to think about it, he can't come up with anything besides bad stereotypes. He's not just ignoring these groups; he's not even thinking about these groups as people! In his mind, they're these broad monoliths of ugly stereotypes.
Here's the killer part of Adams' request towards the end...
But then his request gets... uncomfortable. He starts by saying that he's looking to showcase some other perspectives...
I don’t want you to produce the normal Dilbert comic. I want you to introduce a new character or a new perspective so we see something entirely different. I’d love to see any workplace perspective that is not a generic white guy. Show me a new point of view – female, gay, Latino, African-American – whatever you want. Introduce a new character and see if it sticks.Not exactly elegant wording there, but I suppose the intent is... is 'sincere' the right word? Not exactly, but it seems like he's trying to respond to criticisms of misogyny and white-washing in a positive manner.
But the "see if it sticks" part rings pretty false to me. I mean, he's offering people a week-long gig on the strip. Even if you dropped the entire current cast of Dilbert for the whole week to focus on the more diverse cast you were trying to ham-fistedly insert into Dilbert, a week's not enough time to "see if it sticks." That's one of the reasons why syndicates have aspiring cartoonists submit at least TWO weeks of strips to even be considered for anything. And, hell, one of the last big "hits" of strips, Pearls Before Swine, ran exclusively online for a full year before it was felt that there was enough support to put it into print! Does Adams really think fans of what Dilbert has been for the past quarter century will suddenly rave about a new and totally different type of character that's suddenly dropped in for a week?
Adams continues...
For background, the reason Dilbert lacks diversity is because the market does not yet allow a white male to write humor about well-organized minority groups. The problem is that all comic characters have exaggerated and stereotyped flaws. That’s what makes them funny. I can write about white-guy-nerd flaws because I am one. And I can write about white guy leaders who are jerks because leaders have power. But I could not introduce a gay or African-American character and assign that character a stereotypical flaw. The market is not yet mature enough for that.
Look, I know the newspaper funnies aren't exactly a sea of diversity representation, either on the page or off. But haven't other white creators done just fine adding minority characters WITHOUT resorting to stereotypes? Franklin in Peanuts; Lt. Flap in Beetle Bailey; Oliver in Bloom County; Marcus, Phoebe and Eugene in FoxTrot; Lawrence in For Better or Worse; Caulfield in Frazz... It's not as long a list as it should be, certainly, but my point is that being a cishetero white person doesn't mean you can't introduce non-cishetero white characters and it doesn't mean that you have to rely on bad stereotypes.
And I think that seems to be the thing that Adams has failed to grasp when people criticize the "generic white guy" approach he has with Dilbert. The absence of diversity in his strip is a problem only in part because he doesn't even think about representing a broader population; the more significant problem is that when he IS forced to think about it, he can't come up with anything besides bad stereotypes. He's not just ignoring these groups; he's not even thinking about these groups as people! In his mind, they're these broad monoliths of ugly stereotypes.
Here's the killer part of Adams' request towards the end...
Realistically, I will probably find some cartoonists through my industry contacts, but I wanted to spread a wider net just in case there is some hidden talent lurking.So he's not really going to give your submission that much consideration anyway? He's going to rely on the connections within the decidedly cishetero white boys club to look for diversity? Anything I suggested earlier about sincerity or responding positively? Chuck that out the window.
Tess Fowler, as you may know, is the current artist on Rat Queens. She relayed a story via Twitter earlier this week that speaks to a whole host of issues, not the least of which is dealing with hurtful relatives. And no, I'm not trying to ruin anyone's Christmas -- she ends on a decidedly more upbeat note -- I'm showing how a person can reclaim her life as her own despite others' attempts to destroy her. Fowler doesn't go into too much detail here precisely how she was able to break free from so much of it, but that people can and are willing to help others is what I try to advocate in my own meager way here.
Ugh. The issue ive been dealing w: a loved one screaming at me repeatedly because I advocate online about racism/trans issues but not vegans
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Sending me lengthy emails telling me "#blacklivesmatter but animal lives dont?" That I'm a murderer. Unsolicited lengthy angry emails.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015I eventually snapped. Of course. I was being bullied and abused. It was such a repeat of my mother's behavior and from a loved one to boot.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015This person provoked me on and before my birthday. Dragged it out for days. And when I snapped she blamed me as an instigator.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Why? Because I wouldn't agree that veganism was more important than black folks dying. This was FAMILY. And they were dead serious.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015So after I snapped this person went off the deep end. There was no agreeing 2 disagree/I was the bad guy. They told family it was all me
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Because it was family and I have so little of that left I tried to save it. Which of course was a miserable failure. Lesson learned right?
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Wrong. It still hurts. There has been no apology. Its nothing I haven't been thru tho. My mother is the same way.--
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015I realize now that my anti racism stance was at fault. It was a trigger for this person. Hence the blind attack.--
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015But it still harms me. Even now. I love this person who was lost to me before I even knew it. I tried everything.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015And in the end I will be blamed by others. People find it easy to blame me for defending myself even if I spend days/yrs being patient-
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015This is why troll attacks usually roll off my back. My kinfolk do this to me. Always have. Trolls have nothing on my family.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015My "normal" has always involved abuse, manipulation, threats of disownment and abandonment etc. I'm kinda bulletproof to most BS as a result
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015But after me telling you all this you can kind of start to see where my lifelong anxiety stems from lol
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Imagine being five trying to navigate a whole family of that. My grandmother joked I was a long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Waiting for the other abusive shoe to drop. I'll never get an apology. My broken heart over it means nothing to anyone. I'm used to that-
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Last of the family who had any emotional weight in my life imploded and attempted to saw her way free of me. Because I'm an advocate.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015I'm going to carry this wound until its a faded old scar. And I'll always blame myself even tho I know I couldn't have changed it.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015I come from a family where the sexual physical and emotional abuse of children was NORMAL. I was disowned/abused for fighting it.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015My sense of safety has always been compromised or just non existent. But still even now I am sure it was all my fault. It wasn't..but it WAS
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015THIS is why I dread the holidays every year. This is where I come from. But now I'm building my own traditions. Sushi. Movies. Etc
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Soon I'll have one more nasty scar. But a little more peace too.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Its weird to go thru life knowing ur family sees no value in ur existence. Its surreal. But it does get better.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015The pain doesn't leave. It fades quite a bit tho. Its survivable. I know many of u may feel right now like that's not true for you.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015I am a survivor of child abuse, rape, and all manner of shit. Yes YOU can survive too. This is why I fight. Why I advocate.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015I tell you all this because I want you to know I still struggle too. Its not always easy for me either. You're not alone.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015Pigeons, I know the holidays can be rough. I love you and I'm always here if you need an ear.
— Tess Fowler (@TessFowler) December 22, 2015
- Karan Bhasin picks out several Indian comic books worth reading.
- Keidra Chaney & Raizel Liebler discuss default whiteness in media. Although it's not focused on comics specifically, it touches on the recurring issue of the races of fictional characters.
- Jim Shelley admits his predictions for a dire 2015 in comics were off the mark, but he doesn't see things shaping up very well for 2016.
I was probably initially attracted to it by the John Byrne cover. He was working Fantastic Four at the time, and I had been loving it since I discovered the book a couple years earlier. But what I recall striking me after I started reading it was the number of creators I hadn't heard of. There were a lot of guys I recognized: Jack Kirby, Joe Shuster, John Buscema, Neal Adams... basically a lot of big names in the superhero genre. (I was barely a teenager at the time; that was all I knew.) There were some other names that I was kind of passingly familiar with: Harvey Kurtzman, C.C. Beck, Alex Toth, Jack Davis... but these were guys whose style was so distinctive that it was easy to spot.
But then there were a bunch of guys I'd never heard of. Matt Baker, Reed Crandall, Lou Fine, Fred Guardineer, Mac Raboy... Mostly guys from the '30s and '40s. As I had no real concept of comics' history at that point -- the entirety of my knowledge of comics history was basically: 1938, Superman; 1939, Batman; 1941, Captain America; 1961, Fantastic Four -- the book proved very insightful. Even though each artist got only a single page, that was far more than I was aware of at the time. I daresay that, for some of those creators, it was the most that had ever been published about them up until that point.
I was, however, sadly disappointed with the art. The selections were interesting and not always what you might think would be obvious choices. The Shuster sample was a Mr. Mystic page, for example, not Superman. But the reproduction quality left a lot to be desired. The pages were all printed in black and white, but a good number of them were just taken directly from published comics. The colors all became grey tones, and the bad color registration got reprinted. Several pages wound up looking so muddied as to be almost unreadable. The Neal Adams, Alex Schomburg, and Berni Wrightson samples look especially terrible. I could understand in the cases of some of the older art not being available, but even the then-recent images from Walt Simonson and Bill Sienkiewicz from only a year or two earlier were taken from the published books.
Goulart was probably the first comics historian of any sort that I read, and from that perspective, I appreciate that he helped usher me into thinking about comics as more than the end product. But I've found that much of what he writes (at least with regards to comics) to be pretty superficial, and rarely gets to any real depth. But, as I said, he was the first historian that I really read and his overviews still came as welcome beacons for the mostly empty comics knowledge-base I had at the time. So while I don't exactly rush out of my way to pick up his latest book, his books are worth a look if you can't tell a Charles Biro page from a Jack Cole one.
I think most creators who try to make a go at comics understand that they're not going to become mega-successful overnight. Even those with unrealistic expectations seem to have an understanding that their wildly brilliant and totally original idea will take some time to disseminate enough that they start raking in the big money. So in the meantime, they take a job to pay the bills. Maybe full-time, maybe part-time. Maybe it's a retail gig, maybe it's food service, maybe it's data processing in a cube farm. Whatever the case, the creator is decidedly thinking of it in terms of a job, not a career. They split their time between doing something to pay the bills, and doing something they have a passion for, hoping that they'll eventually be able to do the former via the latter.
And that makes sense. By doing a job and not pursuing a career, the creator is able to devote more time and brain capacity towards making and promoting their comic. It allows them to focus on what's working and what isn't in their comic, and to improve their craft. But I'm struck by two considerations that a creator should keep in mind...
1) If the comic doesn't take off (and let's be honest -- most of them don't) then that job used to pay the bills becomes a career. And because the creator wasn't focusing on it as such, and because many of those jobs aren't very lucrative in the first place, that means their unintentionally adopted career has already plateaued. If they're doing at least a decent job, they'll probably get performance and/or cost of living raises from time to time, but their chances of significant advancement are limited. If you're not focused on trying to get a management job, they'll be more than happy to keep you slinging hamburgers or re-folding sweaters or whatever indefinitely.
Now some people can use this as an encouragement to put more effort into bettering their comic. "I don't want to be doing this shit job for the rest of my life, so I had better figure out how to kick ass as a comic creator." That works for some people but, of course, not everyone. If you want to take this approach, I suggest knowing in advance whether you're the type of person who's motivated that way or not.
2) The other consideration is that, if you're doing a job instead of pursuing a career, you're going to be viewed that way from the people who've hired you. We're increasingly living in a culture where employees of all sorts are just considered interchangeable cogs, but the farther down the pay scale you are, the more you're thought of in that way. Corporations and the people running them don't two shits about you, and will be more than happy to let you go if it means their year-end bonus is a little fatter. Which means that the income you'd be relying on while trying to get your comic career going is probably more tenuous than it should be.
This all then ties back to a point I tried to make a few years back. That if you're pursuing a career in comics, you need to have several irons in the fire financially. Even if your focus is entirely on your webcomic, you can't rely exclusively on advertising or Patreon or whatever. You almost need to constantly juggle several different revenue streams to help create a safety net. There's obviously going to be greater emphasis on some avenues over others, but it goes back to the old adage of not keeping all your eggs in one basket. You want to make sure you've got options open if/when something comes crashing down unexpectedly. Because your day job got cut, or your biggest sponsor closes up shop, or whatever.
The ongoing challenge is that you essentially never get much of a chance to rest. Because our economy is such that it's almost working against anyone not making six figures, it's going to be a near-constant uphill battle. I don't mean to come across as fatalistic or anything, I think assuming that your current status -- whatever it might be -- will be disrupted in the near future is what is going to be necessary to keep from not just staying in place but sliding backwards. If I'm overly cynical, that cynicism is directed at the society as a whole and not comics in particular.
Freelancing has always been a hard gig. It does allow a great deal of freedom that being a corporate drone does not. But it also comes with some additional challenges of keeping a constant vigil of your horizons, and ensuring that you're paying attention to where things are headed so that you can leap off sinking ships but still have some semblance of an escape plan laid out.
And that makes sense. By doing a job and not pursuing a career, the creator is able to devote more time and brain capacity towards making and promoting their comic. It allows them to focus on what's working and what isn't in their comic, and to improve their craft. But I'm struck by two considerations that a creator should keep in mind...
1) If the comic doesn't take off (and let's be honest -- most of them don't) then that job used to pay the bills becomes a career. And because the creator wasn't focusing on it as such, and because many of those jobs aren't very lucrative in the first place, that means their unintentionally adopted career has already plateaued. If they're doing at least a decent job, they'll probably get performance and/or cost of living raises from time to time, but their chances of significant advancement are limited. If you're not focused on trying to get a management job, they'll be more than happy to keep you slinging hamburgers or re-folding sweaters or whatever indefinitely.
Now some people can use this as an encouragement to put more effort into bettering their comic. "I don't want to be doing this shit job for the rest of my life, so I had better figure out how to kick ass as a comic creator." That works for some people but, of course, not everyone. If you want to take this approach, I suggest knowing in advance whether you're the type of person who's motivated that way or not.
2) The other consideration is that, if you're doing a job instead of pursuing a career, you're going to be viewed that way from the people who've hired you. We're increasingly living in a culture where employees of all sorts are just considered interchangeable cogs, but the farther down the pay scale you are, the more you're thought of in that way. Corporations and the people running them don't two shits about you, and will be more than happy to let you go if it means their year-end bonus is a little fatter. Which means that the income you'd be relying on while trying to get your comic career going is probably more tenuous than it should be.
This all then ties back to a point I tried to make a few years back. That if you're pursuing a career in comics, you need to have several irons in the fire financially. Even if your focus is entirely on your webcomic, you can't rely exclusively on advertising or Patreon or whatever. You almost need to constantly juggle several different revenue streams to help create a safety net. There's obviously going to be greater emphasis on some avenues over others, but it goes back to the old adage of not keeping all your eggs in one basket. You want to make sure you've got options open if/when something comes crashing down unexpectedly. Because your day job got cut, or your biggest sponsor closes up shop, or whatever.
The ongoing challenge is that you essentially never get much of a chance to rest. Because our economy is such that it's almost working against anyone not making six figures, it's going to be a near-constant uphill battle. I don't mean to come across as fatalistic or anything, I think assuming that your current status -- whatever it might be -- will be disrupted in the near future is what is going to be necessary to keep from not just staying in place but sliding backwards. If I'm overly cynical, that cynicism is directed at the society as a whole and not comics in particular.
Freelancing has always been a hard gig. It does allow a great deal of freedom that being a corporate drone does not. But it also comes with some additional challenges of keeping a constant vigil of your horizons, and ensuring that you're paying attention to where things are headed so that you can leap off sinking ships but still have some semblance of an escape plan laid out.
I thought I'd try something new here since I'm contributing to several different things these days beyond just my blog. In case you missed something I did for FreakSugar, or a podcast I was on, or something that popped up in print, or whatever, I'm going to start running this Weekly Recap to highlight everything I've had published in the past week. There won't be much by way of additional commentary; just basically links to everything as a kind of weekend round-up. Items will be run in chronological order of publication, with the oldest ones at the top. And with that said, here's what I was up to this week...
On Business: Charging Your Customers
Webcomics - Reviews of Strong Female Protagonist , Existential Comics , and Bucko
http://ift.tt/1IRYNEk
http://ift.tt/1IRYNEk
