New years' eats

Google Search: what is salt pork reveals that fatback becomes salt pork when salt-cured and that salt pork is similar to American-style bacon, but unsmoked. Imputed is that American-style bacon is a bit more to the meat side than the straight-up salt pork.

Why, in the name of God, do I look this up?

My parents always make Hoppin’ John for New Years; I have adapted the tradition to make Cuban-style black beans para mi espoza every year.

As I was gettin’ the fixins (beans, rice, green pepper, bacon, salt, black pepper, garlic, onions if you’re in the mood) I wondered how close the substituted bacon is to the usually-called for salt pork; now I know. Pretty close.

Mmmm. I smells the garlic and sich. Gettin’ hungry.

At midnight we’ll eat the twelve grapes before trying to find a shot of downtown Vegas. Then we’ll stand on the steps of our apartment building with our neighbor Peter to watch the Needle explode.

KG + LV = snow, fear

As I have said, ex-co-worker and NJ blogger KG of the ID headed to LA, CA and LV, NV for R’n’R. With New Year’s Day on the doorstep, it should be noted that hard on the heels of the wellridiculed FBI alert concerning the consultation of almanacs (or as I’ve seen it, al manaqi), an unexpected snowstorm dusted the usually leaflet-littered reaches of the Strip, just in advance of the holiday that is being discussed as the probable locus of the recent Paris-LAX hubbub.

Somehow, I feel certain that this is related. If only I had total information awareness. I shall remain vigilant.

Snow '03

As I type, it’s snowing heavily with about an inch on the ground.

The flakes are dense in the air and swirling but the night is windless.

too quiet

Sure is quiet out there.

Rumor has it that Ken Goldstein products may put in a return appearance.

In other news, I applied for seventy-nine jobs today. Wonder if I’ll get a call back.

Sun, Wind, Rain

Just a quick pointer to the Tablet-posted ROTK review, for comparison. My Ink and Pixels column catches up with Pete Bagge, and I review a couple other flicks on that ROTK link, too.

Looking about elsewhere, I note that Maciej has brought over some coverage from the other side of the pond of our recent sleepless nights, and that Paul F. has combed his files for a bit of self-examination of the ego-boosting variety, something we should applaud in his case. Go Paul!

For my part, I could tell you about the torrential downpour that killed campers in California as viewed from the Pacific Coast Highway between San Diego and Los Angeles at 11:30 at night. Or I could tell you about seeing a certain New Jersey based blogger in the City of Angels, much like a certain Sienfeld episode, except there was no comedy and it wasn’t on TV.

Confidential to the TV producer who did lunch with us:

There is nothing “creepy” about either the Ken Goldstein Project or the neglected musical comedy sensation Kensapoppin’, and I’ll have you know there are other interested parties seeking face time, so… what I’m saying here is if you want an option, now’s the time to act. “Creepy”! Mother Goldstein never mentioned “creepy”! But if you feel like we need to play up the whole stalker angle, well, I can see how that might appeal to a certain demographic base, yadda yadda yadda…

Or I could even tell you about scoring last minute tenth-row seats to see the LA production of The Producers with Jason Alexander and Martin Short, where it became apparent that Mr. Alexander is uniquely qualified to play the lead role in any potential revivals of Kensapoppin’ for stage or screen.

But if I did, I’d ruin my material.

Craig Thompson transcript – Contents

This provides a Table of Contents that presents the eight parts of my conversation with Craig Thompson in order (and, being posted last, sits at the top of the Category listing for the material)

Craig Thompson transcript – Contents
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 1
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 2
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 3
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 4
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 5
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 6
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 7
Craig Thompson transcript – Part 8

Craig Thompson transcript – part 8

In very early November 2003, I interviewed 28-year-old Portland cartoonist and illustrator Craig Thompson for my column in the Seattle alternative publication Tablet, Ink and Pixels. I’m running the transcript here in nine parts. Craig’s web site is here. He is published by Top Shelf.

In Part Seven, we’d just discussed the possibility of comparisons between Thompson’s book and the work of fellow Top Shelf artist Jeffrey Brown.

M: Now I gotta go back to talking about [Thompson’s brother] Phil briefly. Now, this is kind of a weird question, and I really debated whether I wanted to ask it or not. But I think it’s important that I can ask. You can just say, I don’t wanna talk about it or whatever.

Um, you touched on Eric Gill earlier; you mentioned the mix of devout religiousness and you said, I think, ‘he was a sick little perv’ or words to that effect. I would probably say, ‘perhaps he was more interested in fetish sexuality,’ as a way of getting around you know, putting a value judgment on the behavior or the desire.

CT: Are we talking about Eric Gill?

M: Yes. Okay. But I’m leading up. I’m pussyfooting around.

CT: I would definitely place him in the pervert realm, though. Because, see he, I believe, yeah, he had sex with his own children.

M: That’s pretty perverted.

And here’s the question that I’m kind of avoiding asking. You depict you and your brother urinating on each other in bed. You sleep together throughout your childhood. It’s depicted without any sexual overtones. But, you do put him in Batman Underoos, which has that Batman symbol, which looks like the labrys symbol that we talked about earlier!

CT: Oh, wow! Another subconscious thing!

M: And, you know, fetish sexuality in adults, is something which in my experience of friends that are interested in it, a lot of times is associated with having experienced abuse as kids. And watersports is, um, you know, a well-recognized subset of fetish sexuality.

CT: Yeah.

M: Can you talk about this in general terms? I’m not wanting to invade your privacy exactly, but…

CT: No, No no no!

But I’m totally milking that for the full humor angle.

M: Oh yeah, I don’t thin-

CT: I mean, I really don’t – I don’t get watersports. I mean whatever floats someone’s boat. But, uh, um, and like you said, there is probably that very obvious connection with those sort of childhood experiences.

M: Sure.

CT: But it truly doesn’t have any appeal to me. But poop and pee are very funny.

M: Certainly, can’t go wrong with poop and pee. And add a monkey in there and you’re, you’re good.

CT: [laughs] I wish I could elaborate more.

M: Yeah, I couldn’t figure out how to fully frame the question, really. Essentially, there’s this subtext where you’re showing this forbidden activity that can have sexual overtones; you don’t show it in a way the does have sexual overtones; and that would be the end of it except for the Batman symbol. That was the thing really made me kinda start scratching my head, and think ‘boy is there something else going on here’?

CT: A lot of people have found it very specifically controversial to them. They’ll be like, “This’ll be the scene. This’ll be your Judy Blume scene, this’ll be what gets people outraged.”

M: [laughs] I hope not!

I don’t know, God. Well, with any luck you’ll get banned and get some press, but I don’t know.

CT: They’ll be burning it along with Last Temptation of Christ.

M: [chuckling] yeah. Yeah, well. You know, if you had Jesus come out of the wall and have sex with the both of ya, then maybe, you know. Next time, you won’t make that mistake again.

Um, well thank you for bearing with me on asking that question. It’s definitely – it’s like, the pieces are there. But it just seemed like it was something that sort of happened organically without – I don’t know.

CT: Yeah, I wish there was more, but…

M: Uh… Let’s see. Um, oh yeah! To what extent, moving away from asking about the reactions of people in and out of your life to the material, to what extent were you aware of shaping the story? I mean, did you, like, write fifteen drafts of it and uh, get the screenwriter’s manual to have you know, first, second, third acts? I mean, how much effort went into the shaping of the story itself?

CT: I spent a year. Just writing. It was a lot. Especially compared to the Chunky Rice, which was a sort of stream of consciousness. But I spent a year doing real detailed thumbnail forms and then went through at least two specific edits, and even after a year of fiddling with it, the ending still wasn’t quite right, but I just started drawing final pages. And once I got back to the ending after two years of drawing, suddenly the ending was finally ready, presented itself. But I mean I’m doing this all part time too, I mean, I had to pay the bills, I had to work.

M: Yeah. Now, um, in terms of like script and thumbnailing, your process is to thumbnail and take notes or to thumbnail with a typewritten script, or script and then thumbnail, or what do you do?

CT: I did really detailed thumbnails of the whole book. Which, you know, some cartoonists were, “Just publish these! These are completely…” they were almost finished, and they were legible. I did ’em that way so I could show ’em around and get some feedback from people. I definitely won’t do ’em that detailed next time.

But uh, my process was pretty much – like in the morning I would do an even quicker thumbnail, which was totally illegible if I were to look at it like two hours later, even to myself, but if I really quickly took those really illegible thumbnails and transformed then into more detailed forms then I knew what was going on.

M: Uh huh, uh huh.

CT: But I would have a jot, like just a blob, a scribble, and somehow I would know what the character was saying, what was happening. For a couple hours, and then it would fade.

M: And so…

CT: So there were two versions of the thumbnails, but one only existed, literally, for hours.

M: Right, right.

CT: The other one had to sit around for a year.

M: And you, then, don’t have an independent, just-prose script that you’re using for reference. That’s embedded in to what, I guess, the second draft of the thumbnails probably?

CT: It all comes together at once.

M: Right.

CT: Not separated.

M: Let’s see – we talked about that, yes, okay – Um, in Blankets, how much penciling do you do? Because you’re relying so heavily on the brush; I was just curious about how penciled the pages are.

CT: Uh, actually, fairly penciled. I would pencil two pages in the morning before lunchtime; and then ink ’em in the afternoon.

M: And do you work with a blue pencil or just a regular lead, or…

CT: Yeah. Just a regular pencil. Actually, I don’t use barely any white out or anything – but uh, but I also make a mess of my pages with the lead underneath. I’ll just make a mess of panels and then go back and erase it.

M: Right. I think that’s something that we have the luxury of doing now because of digital repro, I mean, it’s something that you couldn’t do fifteen years ago.

Um, how many pages a day were you trying to do when you were working on it?

CT: Two.

M: So it’s pretty much two years of solid work then.

CT: Yeah.

M: Wow.

CT: And there’d be like three months on end where I couldn’t touch the book; where I had so many freelance-work illustration projects just to pay the bills.

M: Sure. As far as I can see, with just one like brief exception, you – it’s completely hand lettered, is that correct?

CT: Yeah, that’s the one thing I hadn’t done with a brush. I did that with a Micron pen.

M: And do you use Speedballs at all [brass-nibbed dip-ink pens, an illustration standby]?

CT: Nope.

M: So you just – what brushes do you use?

CT: The number two or number three. You know one of the kind of uh Winsor Newton sable-synthetic blend, the four or five dollar brushes.

M: Sure, sure. Are you picky about the hairs? I mean, can you use a camel brush?

CT: Well I kinda trash my brushes, and then they start to work better, you know?

M: Oh, interesting, because you get the edging on the line probably.

And here’s the other thing – you know, brush is – it’s like the hardest of the ink mediums to master. Um, what led you to it?

CT: Um, right from the beginning, when I was getting interested in comics, this would have been like in community college – which I only attended for a year – but a friend had me do a strip for the newspaper, and so, “Okay, I gotta figure out how people do comics,” and I got all the cheeseball books out of the library, and I initially was ruling my panels and using like an Eames lettering guide to do the lettering. And a lot of those things I abandoned quite quickly. I’m like, “Ohh, I can’t”.

You know I tried the lettering with what, a Speedball 2 and it’s just like, I can’t letter with this – hate using rulers and stuff to get all these straight lines. But uh, from the beginning I was like –

You have to use a brush, I’m supposed to! Say, a Number Two Winsor Newton sure is an [inaudible] brush!

I never graduated to that fine of a sable but uh – but so I started with a brush, and that helps, because I had several years under my belt before I even started on Chunky Rice, of working with a brush. And by the time I had finished Chunky Rice, the slick line that I was employing in that book got boring. Because I had enough control of the brush where you know it could be as slick as I wanted it to be and that’s why I broke loose with Blankets and started heading down the expressionistic angle.

M: Yeah, there’s a – the breadth of expressive brushwork in the book is fab. And at the end there’s a couple of scenes where you go from this really heavy brushed thing to this really light linework that the contrast to show the emotional state of the character – it’s a shot of you in fact I think lying in your bedroom or something – yeah that’s it – oh, you’re sitting in your bed, sitting up – is just very effective. It transforms from I think a dream sequence – you know where I’m talking about?

CT: Yeah.

M: It’s really nice.

Alright, so the book’s title is Blankets. The obvious blanket is the blanket you were given by the character of Raina. And then there’s also the blankets that you and your brother share, in bed, and then there’s the blanket of the snow that lies over everything, during Christmas break. Are there other blankets that I’m missing, or is that it?

CT: Well, there’s other metaphorical blankets – since I was initially, you know, thinking of Blankets as things that we cling to for security or comfort, right away I was meditating on those themes.

You know, romantic relationships, family, religion – et cetera. Whatever it might be that’s our security blanket.

M: Fair enough. Oh, let’s see – looks like we did all the good stuff here – we talked about Raina, talked about Craig.

I think that’s about it for now. Do you have any questions for me at this point?

CT: I was just curious what your educational background was.

M: I have a degree in art history, um, I have been an avid comics reader since around 1982 or ’83; I was exposed to comics a little bit when I was a kid growing up, but not a lot. Um, my parents would bring ’em home, but if they’d look at ’em, like a Conan book, they might take it away, you know. [chuckles]

Um, and uh, I experimented with being a cartoonist, but I’m not a storyteller, and so I moved away from working in comics as the medium and uh the longest kinda sustained comics thing that I did was like a daily four-panel for an alternative – it was actually monthly – back in the Midwest where I grew up. I did that for a year or two. I pretty much got to the point where I knew what I was doing technically, but then I just – stopped.

And so I figured that that was a – an indication that that wasn’t the medium that was for me. But I still really love it, and know a reasonable amount about it. I kinda moved away from it during the dot-com time period because I was working on websites and stuff, and came back to it recently when I was realizing that one of the things that I enjoy is doing critical stuff; and there is an opportunity, working with comics, to do the critical work exactly like we did in this conversation here, where I’m speaking to the person that I have these analytical questions about.

Which is a really different – and I think a worthwhile way – of looking at literature…

CT: You do a good job.

M: Well, thank you.

Craig Thompson transcript – part 7

In very early November 2003, I interviewed 28-year-old Portland cartoonist and illustrator Craig Thompson for my column in the Seattle alternative publication Tablet, Ink and Pixels. I’m running the transcript here in nine parts. Craig’s web site is here. He is published by Top Shelf.

In Part Six, Craig had just said he didn’t feel he had the right to initiate contact with the real-life girl the character of Raina was based on, because he’d cut off contact with her.

M: Did you actually burn all that stuff? I mean, both times in the book?

CT: Yeah.

M: Crazy man! Don’t do it again!

CT: Oh, I wouldn’t!

M: Well, good!

CT: That’s the last time I did it in my life, the last time I broke up with someone, to destroy all evidence.

M: Well, you have a responsibility to, to, people in your audience now, too, not to do that. That would be the other thing I would remind you about. Um, now, it’s possible, that that same idea, that you have a responsibility to people in your audience – which you are free to accept or reject as an artist – would argue that you have a responsibility to share the work with her.

Is that something you’ve thought about?

CT: Um, I guess I’ve been operating on the assumption from the beginning that I don’t have the right – as a person that cuts off contact. But maybe I’m wrong. I could be entirely wrong.

M: Well, you also told me that you intended the book as being about establishing and keeping connections.

CT: [pause] uhhh…

M: You can think about this, I’m – it’s just my perspective.

CT: There is another element, that the most immediate emotional inspiration for the book was a different girl. So Raina in that sense represented two different girls. She was on the surface this two-week high-school relationship and at that point in my life she was a long-distance friend that I was longing for. So I’m bundling all of that emotional energy as fuel.

M: And what was the outcome of your um… interesting courtship?

CT: We ended up together.

M: Well, there ya go. So let that be a lesson to all you young cartoonists out there: draw a five-hundred page book…

CT: …and that’s the way to get the girl.

M: And get the girl.

CT: [chuckles]

M: Well, it was apparent to me as I was reading it that Raina, um, was more idealized than the other characters in the book. I mean it just – as someone who has also drawn cartoons, although not as extensively as you, she looked to me like you worked your butt off to get the character design exactly the way you wanted it. You have drawn that woman’s face hundreds more times than appears in the book. That’s what I think. And I’m asking you if that’s true.

CT: Uh, it’s true because the girl that I ended up with was the main model. But not in the earlier parts of the book. So there’s probably a point where – and in there is a point where I went back and fixed some of the drawings, but you know, she became my model for the character, my actual physical model.

M: Ssssstealthy! That’s interesting! So, then, were you doing life drawings from your current partner?

CT: [emphatically] Yes.

M: And, a lot of life drawings from your current partner.

CT: Yes. I mean, they are not all reference, but uh, definitely a lot of them were naturalistic poses, where the figure consumes a large portion of the page. Those were drawings where she sat for me.

M: Right. Now, there’s also the difference in the way in which the Craig character and the other character’s faces are drawn; they are generally more cartoony; and her face – I mean, it’s all lines on paper – but it’s relatively more naturalistic.

CT: Yeah.

M: But at the same time it’s a very kind of idealized representation. Um, and there’s like this – Um, the intensity of the emotion that went into the drawing is what I got out of it. That’s what – maybe I was projecting, but that’s what I felt when I was looking at ’em.

CT: Yeah, okay, that idealization was my method of getting the reader to experience, you know, to look at her the way I did.

M: Right.

CT: You know sometimes a friend will have a crush on a girl or something and point her out, and it’ “Oh, you know, okay, yeah, she’s cute enough” but it just won’t connect with you?

M: Right.

CT: So that was the advantage of having drawings versus photos, I can show what I felt with my eyes, even if wasn’t particularly…

M: Right.

CT: But another connection between those two girls, um, would be – my present girlfriend, and Raina of high-school, was when I met my present girlfriend for the first time, uh, there was a connection. Like I connected the two girls right away, and this would have been like ten – seven, eight years ago. And that night I drew a comic about Raina, the night I met my present girlfriend.

M: Oh, that’s really interesting. Has that ever been published?

CT: No, but I think that I’ll publish it like in about three or four years. I’m gonna put out a collection of a lot of odds and ends that nobody else – that no-one’s seen. You mentioned that SPX anthology piece, and I’ll collect that one.

M: Yeah, like that Expo – I don’t know if I’ll ever be able to track it down because those things go out of print so fast.

Um, oh, that’s all, that’s really fascinating. So in a way, because you feel it was associated with your current girlfriend that the necessary act of inclusion, of sharing the artistic production – that’s been discharged.

CT: Well, you know…

M: Or maybe you don’t feel there’s a debt there.

CT: To be frank I would like to be back in contact with the original Raina. Obviously not in a romantic sense but just to to – re-experience that friendship and everything. To get back in touch, in some sense I think it’s creepy enough that I made this book without her permission.

M: Well, speaking of stuff like that, about the same week that I got a copy of Blankets, uh, I think it was – I can’t remember who the publisher is, but I was sent a copy of Unlikely, have you seen that?

CT: Yeah, I love that book.

M: Um, how do you – there’s gonna be – there have to be – comparisons, because it’s young men recalling their first love. Um, how do you feel about that comparison?

CT: Uhm, I’m flattered, I love Unlikely. You know, I hadn’t thought of it myself; but I guess where it leads – we’re distributed by the same publisher, we sit behind the same table at shows, Jeffrey Brown and I. But we are – I remember reading his – and since I have this sort of self-deprecating quality about myself. I remember reading his thing and thinking, “I wonder if Blankets should have been more like Unlikely.”

M: [laughs]

CT: …which seemed less fulsome – less idealized and ornametal.

M: I understand. It’s also more formal with those single page stories that he adapts for the methodology. I dunno. The other aspect of Unlikely that’s I think different from Blankets is that there’s a strong sense of the reflective mind of you as an artist in Blankets. It’s present in Unlikely but it’s in the drawings rather than in the narrative.

CT: Very understated.

M: Yeah, exactly.

Did you hear um, Jeffrey on This American Life talking about it?

[Ed. – The appearance concerned Clumsy, a prior book by Brown. The link to the audio of the show on the TAL site is to a single RealAudio format file. Brown’s segment begins around 46 minutes in to the show.]

CT: Yeah, I did, and it almost brought me to tears.

M: Well, I thought it was interesting. I thought that the questions he was being asked were – they were legitimate, sensitive questions.

[chuckles]

I almost thought about digging it up and asking you the same exact questions, but I decided not to.

But, uh, yeah, I thought it was fascinating. There’s a definite relationship. You guys will probably start a genre now, you know? Marvel will open an arm, sort of you know, the ‘lost loves’ – No, I’m kidding.

CT: Except for the fact that Jeffrey Brown’s next book is a superhero book. For real.

M: Really?

CT: Yeah.

M: Is it still for um the same publisher?

CT: Yeah.