Review the Third

If this is your first time here, I’m offering you a chance to read not-so-solicited reviews of the Tiny Life Preview.  I’m not just giving the good reviews like so many newcomers tend to do (“If people think that everyone likes it, they’ll buy more!”  It’s the Everybody Loves Raymond syndrome).  I’m posting any review that catches my eye.

This one is from Jay at Happy Harbor Comics in Alberta:

Nick,

The first thing I noticed was that the really old woman didn’t look all that old.  No wrinkles on her face.  If she had died a dozen times, she should look more like it.

The story reads very quickly without saying a lot, a pet peeve of mine with a lot of modern comics.  Pages of similar panels with tiny bits of exposition text that don’t really move the story forward or are redundant to setting mood that feel like pages are being wasted.  I appreciate the imagery but I really felt like I wasn’t getting much of a story from the preview and certainly not enough art to read as well.

I’m a bit old school but I like my stories to move briskly and I like lots of “visual” story to accompany the text to help enhance and overfill my reading.

Jay Bardyla, owner

HAPPY HARBOR COMICS

CANADA’S BEST COMIC STORE – 2007 Shuster Award

  EDMONTON’S BEST COMIC STORE – 2007 SEE Mag Poll

  GLOBAL RETAILER OF THE YEAR – 2007 Eisner Nominee

10112 – 124 Street, Edmonton, AB T5N 1P6

  Phone: 780-452-8211

Wed, Thurs & Fri – Noon to 9pm

  Sat, Sun & Mon – 10 am to 6 pm

  www.happyharborcomics.com

I thought about this review quite a bit.  If you’ll notice, it’s not as long as the other ones, but it seems to say just as much; it still seems like a punch in the gut (anytime anyone isn’t thrilled with Tiny Life – for as hard and as long as I’ve worked on it – I get a tiny tummy ache).  But then I read it a few times looking for separate points; really, Jay’s only got one: like many other comics nowadays, it moves too slow.  Dangnabbit.

I think Jay is of the Chester Gould School of comics: make it as fast and as interesting as possible.  After all, we are talking about comics here; it’s a child’s medium.  If I’m going to read a child’s book, it better damn well go as fast and as hard as possible.  To paraphrase others of like-mind, “It’s comics, stupid.  Keep it moving.”

See, I don’t think comics are necessarily for kids (or grown-ups who want to read material for kids – the Harry Potter crowd).  I think comics are whatever you make of them. 

One of the things I’m trying to do with Tiny Life is to turn comics into “legitimate” literature.  It’s been done on a small scale several times – Maus and Blankets both spring to mind – but I don’t think anyone’s really sat down with an entire series and said, “I want learned people to look at this and compare it to other works of literature.” 

See, I want people to look at Tiny Life and compare God & Country (the 2nd-to-last book to be published) to Paradise Lost.  I want people to look at some of the philosophy raised in Brain Damage / Eclipse (the 4th book to be published) and compare it to some of John Locke’s philosophies.  I want some of the ideas raised, especially in the first few books, to be compared to ideas raised by Ralph Ellison.  Most comic writers seem to really fear the comparison to well-known works of art (which boggles me.  Why wouldn’t you want to be compared to Da Vinci?).  A lot of the discussions I’ve seen revolve around “My Superman vs. Batman is just as good as Frank Miller’s, but it’s different.” 

Actually – and don’t tell anyone – I really don’t read comics that much anymore.  I’ve tried to stay away from the repeated scenarios and stereotypical potshots that many comics take. How many times have you heard, “If you’re not with me, you’re against me,” or a powerful hero (or villain) scream, “That’s enough!”?  I think, if you really think about it, the answer is higher than you care to relate. 

So, I guess to summarize, I disagree with Jay.  I think comics should move at their own pace.  And, when all is said and done, the work itself will tell you whether that pace was too fast, too slow, or just right.

2 Responses to “Review the Third”

  1. comicsfan Says:

    Who the hell do you think you are talking about “changing comics”? I’ve never heard of you, but you think you’re better than Alan Moore, Frank Miller, Mark Millar, Warren Ellis, Neil Gaiman, Peter David, and Brian Bendis? That’s vain and you’re stupid.

  2. I really don’t think you should’ve heard of me. Unless you frequent the comics on lulu.com, or unless you’re a big fan of Nick Jones the computer artist (I googled myself and found this site), there is no reason to have ever read anything I’ve ever written.
    Also, I never said I was any better than any of those spectacular writers you mentioned; I think each one of them is stunning in their own right (although I’ve never read anything by Bendis except Ultimate Spiderman, and I refuse to read much of that because of Bagley). What I did say, though, was that none of them – at least to my knowledge – has ever sought to do something radically different with comics.
    I mean, Miller wanted to do crime stories, so he turned Daredevil into a crime book; that was cool. Gaiman is a natural fantasy writer, so he took fantastic elements that really hadn’t been seen since the 40s and put them into a modern comic; that was cool too.
    What I’m saying is that I don’t believe anyone has written a comic because the story could not have been done any other medium. (although, I guess it could be done as a multi-season cartoon). What I’m saying is that no one created a series in order to change other peoples’ perception of what a comic book is capable of.
    Whether or not I succeed is a different story altogether.
    If I don’t, then you can call me vain and stupid.
    If I do, however…

Leave a comment