Van Jensen -- graphic novelist

Van Jensen -- blogger (Graphic Fiction), graphic novelist (Pinocchio, Vampire Slayer), editor/journalist

1. Graphic fiction, we are told, is in; it has arrived. Academics talk about it, literary publishers include it -- sometimes -- on their lists. But how accepted is it really? Is it genuinely accepted by the high-brow, and viewed with true objectivity? Or is some of the praise that it is given merely bumpf? After all, MFA programs specialize in writing, not graphic fiction; English departments rarely if ever pay attention to graphic fiction; major publishers do not publish much of it, and major prizes never include it in short lists, even though it can be a form of novel. What needs to change for graphic fiction to gain more acceptance?

VJ: If you look at the history of comics (a catch-all for graphic fiction) in America, you see that in the wake of Fredric Wertham's campaign against the medium, comics were ghettoized as an art form for decades. While graphic fiction in Asia and Europe (and even South America) matured with a variety of stories, U.S. comics only survived through superheroes (and Archie). In the recent past, that certainly has started to change with books like Blankets, Maus and Fun Home bringing more academic and critical attention to comics. But I continue to find that the average American consumer doesn't realize there are comics that don't feature heroes wearing silly tights. The fairly dismal sales statistics of most comics and graphic novels reflect this lack of awareness. However, I am optimistic that this is changing. Two very crucial groups are increasingly supporting graphic fiction -- librarians and teachers. If these two communities embrace comics, they will help build a new generation of comics readers. And as those readers age and mature, they will look to a wider variety of comics, and the industry will be healthier over all.


2. According to some observers of the publishing scene such as critic Alex Good, literary fiction (particularly by new authors) is struggling these days while graphic novels are enjoying steady, healthy sales. Any observations on why that is?

VJ: As the author of a "successful" graphic novel series, I can say with certainty that sales aren't quite as sky high as Mr. Good claims. In comics, good sales are measured in thousands. For novels, good sales are measured in millions. However, I think there is more buzz and discussion around comics. Part of that is the Hollywood influence. Comics are particularly well suited to making big-budget movies, and that serves to bring more popular focus back to comics. Literary novels don't really translate to popcorn flicks. Graphic fiction also is a more nascent art form, and that lends it some excitement. For an academic who wants to break new ground, comics are the Wild West, while literary fiction was colonized ages ago. I could also offer a long digression on the many failings of contemporary literary fiction, but I'll save that for another day.

3. There are a lot of comics artists who self-publish.  As in the music industry -- with bands with their own labels -- this is considered perfectly acceptable as long as the creative result is good. Yet self-publishing is deeply frowned upon in literary circles. Why do you think that is?

VJ: I was just discussing that with some fellow creators at Comic-Con. Self-publishing in comics is a badge of honor. In novels, it's pathetic. In comics, this probably traces back to the mid-1980s, when so many indie comics burst onto the scene to great success (i.e. Bone, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Cerebus, etc.), and even beyond that to the underground alt comix scene of the 1960s and '70s. I don't know enough about the history of novel publishing to understand exactly why that community is so opposed to self-publishing. Novels have such a great tradition of self-publishing from Blake to Dickens to Twain. With the advancements in technology, we're seeing the barriers between author and audience being stripped away. I do wonder if perhaps we're entering a new era (see the success of novelist Amanda Hocking), in which the giant publishers no longer are the arbiters of good fiction.

4. How did you start out?

VJ: Start writing? It all came from a love of reading. One of my grandmothers was an English teacher and the other a librarian. Both were published poets. They constantly put great books in my hands, and so I always had a love of good storytelling. I spent some time as a journalist focusing on literary nonfiction, but eventually I felt drawn back to comics (I had been an avid comics reader as a kid and was always drawing). I love how comics mixes text and visuals -- it's just an extremely effective storytelling medium. 

5.What kinds of drawing materials do you use?

VJ: I draw on a smooth bristol and mostly use a very fine brush and ink. When I have time, I incorporate watercolors. I don't much use a pen, because I prefer the variety of line width that a brush offers.

6. Cartoonists tend to refer directly in their work to the influence of other cartoonists, while traditional artists get "left out". Any fine art influences on your work?

VJ: My mom is a painter, and she's by far my biggest influence. I enjoy most of the modernists, particularly Manet. My good friend Neal Obermeyer (www.nealo.com) is an extremely talented artist and helped guide my early forays into comics.

7. How about literary influences?

VJ: Carlo Collodi of course, as his Pinocchio entirely shaped our Pinocchio, Vampire Slayer series. Italo Calvino is another excellent Italian writer. Nobody writes humor better than Mark Twain. I enjoy Capote's work up to In Cold Blood. The Great Gatsby is a cliche answer, but it really is a brilliant book. By far the best recent novel I've read is Tom Rachman's The Imperfectionists.

8. The United States has produced some of the biggest names in experimental comics, as the form has gone through a series of incarnations: the surreal satire of Krazy Kat by George Herriman, to the underground comics of R. Crumb, to the graphic fiction of Chris Ware.  Any other names you'd like to add to the list?

VJ: Josh Cotter might be the preeminent talent in comics right now, and it's extremely disappointing that he doesn't get more credit. His Skyscrapers of the Midwest might be the best graphic novel yet created. Matt Kindt is another singular talent who also incorporates brilliant design. Andy Runton's Owly books are excellent and truly deserve the praise they receive. 

Bio: Van is a former newspaper crime reporter and current magazine editor. He holds a degree in journalism from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, where he was editor in chief of the student newspaper, the Daily Nebraskan. He continues to work as a freelance reporter, contributing to publications such as Atlanta magazine, Sojourners, Publishers Weekly, Comic Foundry, Comic Book Resources, the Omaha World-Herald, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, the Lincoln Journal-Star and the Lawrence Journal-World.

He is the winner of a William Randolph Hearst award and has been recognized by Harvard’s Nieman Foundation for Journalism and elsewhere.

Michael Cho -- illustrator, writer

Michael Cho of Michael Cho's Sketchbook:

1. Graphic fiction, we are told, is in; it has arrived. Academics talk about it, literary publishers include it -- sometimes -- on their lists. But how accepted is it really? Is it genuinely accepted by the high-brow, and viewed with true objectivity? Or is some of the praise that it is given merely bumpf? After all, MFA programs specialize in writing, not graphic fiction; English departments rarely if ever pay attention to graphic fiction; major publishers do not publish much of it, and major prizes never include it in short lists, even though it can be a form of novel. What needs to change for graphic fiction to gain more acceptance?

"Graphic fiction" as you call it, or "comics" as I call it, has never been more accepted in the mainstream as it is now.  However, as you point out, it still has a long way to go before it gains real acceptance as a literary art form.  I see graphic novels entering into "10 best books of the year" lists more and more now, but sometimes, I think it's almost tokenism.  And other times, I've seen active discrimination by judges against graphic novels being entered into such lists.  

I think the real breakthrough will come when those who are prejudiced against comics as a literary form finally start to view comics as a medium and not a genre.  Too many people still equate "comics" and "graphic novels" with super heroes, or zombies, or funny animals.  And of course, various publishers in comics feed the confusion by packaging such material under the label of "graphic novel".   I enjoy super hero comics, but I don't believe that's all comics are -- just as I enjoy action movies but don't believe that those are the only kind of stories movies can tell.

  

2. According to some observers of the publishing scene such as critic Alex Good, literary fiction (particularly by new authors) is struggling these days while graphic novels are enjoying steady, healthy sales. Any observations on why that is?

I think our society is just that much more multi-media and visual now.  I see educators who would have rejected comics and graphic novels in their classrooms a generation ago now embracing their potential for reaching reluctant readers.   Ultimately, it's all determined by the quality of the content.  If there's more people reading graphic novels these days, there must be some really good graphic novels out there then.

3. How did you start out?

I was always drawing.  Since I was 3 years old.  I started writing a lot later, when I realized I had stories I wanted to tell.  However, it took me until my 30's before I had the skills to draw my stories with the kind of fidelity that I had in mind.

4. There are a lot of comics artists who self-publish.  As in the music industry -- with bands with their own labels -- this is considered perfectly acceptable as long as the creative result is good. Yet self-publishing is deeply frowned upon in literary circles. Why do you think that is?

I'm no good on this one.  I don't have much knowledge of acceptable practices in literary circles. 

5. You have some nice stand-alone sketches at your blog -- for example, a family portrait with your daughter and wife, and a landscape of a Toronto back alley. How do you produce these works? Life sketcthing? Photo sources? Memory? Or a mix?

It's a mix of all.  I take reference photos for some paintings, while others are done from a mix of memory and imagination.  Pretty much like any other illustrator.

6. Cartoonists tend to refer directly in their work to the influence of other cartoonists, while traditional artists get "left out". Any fine art influences on your work?

Lots.  I enjoy "high art" as much as I enjoy "low art".  Among the artists that have influenced my work at one point or another:

Michelangelo, Edvard Munch, Egon Schiele, Edward Hopper, Alex Colville, Gerhard Richter, Alex Katz, Richard Diebenkorn...I could go on and on.

7. Westerners are well aware of the manga scene from Japan. Not so many are aware that there's a flourishing manhwa scene in South Korea.  Any Asian comics/artists that have influenced you?

I grew up in South Korea reading manhwa, but didn't know the names of the artists.  Those were the first comics I ever saw.  

As an adult, I have to say one of my favourite manga creators is Yoshihiro Tatsumi.  His work was a revelation and left a great impact on me.  I also have a great respect for Kazuo Koike's artwork.  

8. Canada has produced a bounty of strong graphic fiction artists, including Julie Doucette, Chester Brown, DaveCollier, Seth, etc. Any newer names you'd like to add to the list?

Canada has an exceptionally large and diverse pool of talented cartoonists/graphic novelists/whatever you call them.  Among my favourites who are not on your list: John Martz, Joe Ollman, Matt Forsythe, Zach Worton and Scott Chantler.

Noteworthy

CNQ has a new issue out. Check out its online version.

Via the TNQ blog, the particularly appalling case of the torture of Bahraini poet Ayat el-Gormezi.

Noteworthy

Republican senator Tom Coborn proposes nine trillion dollars of tax cuts, including massive cuts to social programs. One of the more controversial aspects of the plan is to cut veterans' health benefits -- an echo of the 1930s, when World War One veterans also had their benefits cut (some committed suicide as a result). He also, and unsurprisingly, proposes breathtakingly modest cuts to the most capital intensive aspect of military spending: weapons systems -- 10 aircraft carriers instead of 11, and one less Navy air wing.

Scott Chantler -- illustrator, graphic novelist

Scott Chantler of scottchantler.com, Two Generals,Tower of Treasure, Northwest Passage, etc:

1. Graphic fiction, we are told, is in; it has arrived. Academics talk about it, literary publishers include it -- sometimes -- on their lists. But how accepted is it really? Is it genuinely accepted by the high-brow, and viewed with true objectivity? Or is some of the praise that it is given merely bumpf? After all, MFA programs specialize in writing, not graphic fiction; English departments rarely if ever pay attention to graphic fiction; major publishers do not publish much of it, and major prizes never include it in short lists, even though it can be a form of novel. What needs to change for graphic fiction to gain more acceptance?

SC: Honestly, I think the answer is just time. Change takes time, and there will eventually come a point when no one will be able to remember a time when comics weren't taught in schools and discussed at cocktail parties. We've already made ENORMOUS strides in the last 20 years, so I'm always a little uncomfortable complaining about whatever little distance there is left to cover. The time that Will Eisner dreamed about, when comics are thought of as literature, sold in bookstores, studied academically, etc. is here. It's now. And those few people who still don't "get it," that wouldn't read comics under ANY circumstances, are probably not going to change their minds anyway. They're the people who are so closed-minded and old-fashioned that they likely still don't think of movies as art, either, or rock 'n' roll as music.

2. According to critic Alex Good, literary fiction is selling poorly these days and graphic novels are doing better. Is this as far as you know true?

SC: I don't generally keep track of sales numbers, other than for my own books (and even that can be a challenge, given how much they try to keep those numbers from being conveniently available to authors). But I'm often told that graphic books and eBooks is where the growth is happening in publishing. So it seems that somebody thinks so.

3. How did you start out?

SC: I was a reasonably successful commercial illustrator in the nineties, but of course that wasn't what I really wanted to do. Comics, though, as you may recall, were in a pretty bad place then, and I was having no luck trying to break in, even with small publishers. So, just for the sake of putting something out there, and maybe attracting a few more eyeballs to my illustration website, I started a daily web strip. This was in 2000, before everybody and their uncle was doing a webcomic, so it was fairly easy to get noticed by doing one. I didn't even do it for very long, maybe three months...but it was enough to have built a small following, which included comic book writer J. Torres. He and I began to correspond by email, and talked about doing something together. That something turned out to be Days Like This from Oni Press, which was my first graphic novel

4 There are a lot of comics artists who self-publish. As in the music industry -- with bands with their own labels -- this is considered perfectly acceptable as long as the creative result is good. Yet self-publishing is deeply frowned upon in literary circles. Why do you think that is?

SC: I'm not well-versed enough in the history of literary publishing to be able to know for sure. But I assume it has something to do with the fact that the world of publishing has traditionally been so broad -- many different publishers, many different genres, etc. -- that if you didn't fit in somewhere, it must have been because you weren't very good. In comics, as in your music example, the medium had (perhaps "has") by contrast been controlled by a comparatively small number of publishers putting out an alarmingly narrow selection of material. So if you wanted to do anything besides draw superhero comics (or make pop records) you pretty much had to self-publish, or do it with an indie publisher (or indie label, in music) for little or no money. So rather than being someone who'd tried to fit into a wide market and failed, you were heroically thumbing your nose at a mainstream that defined itself too narrowly.

5. Canada has produced a bounty of strong graphic fiction artists, including Julie Doucette, Chester Brown, Seth, etc. Any newer names you'd like to add to the list?

SC: Man, there are so many that I'd be afraid of leaving somebody out. Darwyn Cooke, Jeff Lemire, Faith Erin Hicks, Stuart Immonen, Ray Fawkes, Cameron Stewart, Michael Cho, Svetlana Chmakova, Francis Manapul, Andy Belanger, Kean Soo, Bryan Lee O'Malley, Tin Can Forest, James Stokoe, Pascal Girard, Michel Ribagliati, Kate Beaton, John Martz...I could go on all day. There's something in the water here, I swear.

Noteworthy

Michael Martone interviewed by Christopher Higgs of HTML Giant (via Dan Green)

Anderson Brown - lit-blogger, professor of philosophy

Anderson Brown of Anderson Brown's Literary Blog

1. When I started this interview series it was already clear that publishing -- especially of literary fiction -- was in dire straits. At that time, one explanation that was fashionable was 9/11 was the reason people weren't reading as much literature (or as much anything) as they used to. Now we are living in a time when the long-term repercussions of 9/11 are still with us. But using 9/11 as a primary explanation for what ails literary publishing simply doesn't work. For one thing, we are now in the midst of a particularly serious recession, and for another, it is clear the general decline in reading is a widespread -- and possibly unstoppable -- phenomenon that has roots which go back decades.

What is your take on the current depressed state of literary publishing? Is it a passing phase? Or is it an intractable problem -- in other words, it is the new normal? And if the latter, what can be down to counteract it? 

AB:  don’t think 911 is probably the fraughtest variable here, I see the situation more as driven by information technology. I’ve yet to look at an electronic book myself but everybody seems to think they’re swell so maybe they are.

I think that traditional literary publishing is in dire straits, that is not at all the same thing as serious literature being in dire straits. In fact we are awash in excellent writers from all over the world.

2. How much potential do you think the Internet has as a vehicle of publishing? It's clear that there is a place for online criticism; the lit-blogosphere is dominated by it. The blogger Dan Green has even coined a phrase for this form of critical writing: the crit-blogosphere. But the crit-blogosphere's logical partner -- the fic-blogosphere -- is marginalized. Not many people read short stories or novels online.

Will the Internet really become the medium in which serious people both publish and read fiction? Or is this a technological pipe-dream, and is it more a question of using the Internet as an effective means to sell and distribute printed books?

AB: At the moment the internet is such an effective means of selling and distributing printed books that overall book sales are up, despite the fact that some more traditional publishers and booksellers are struggling to keep up. But in time I predict that the internet will indeed be the principal conduit of information and anyone practicing any kind of intellectual or literary craft will be living and working with the internet.

3. It is arguable the Internet isn't effective as a medium for publishing long works of fiction because very few people can stand looking at regular screens for the necessary length of time. But e-ink provides a solution to this. It eliminates eye strain. 

How much potential do you think e-ink and e-book technologies have? Do you see e-books catching on with the public? And do they provide a reasonable business model?

AB: They’re a huge success. The younger faculty here at the state university, 20-30s crowd, are all into these text-accessing gizmos, on the grounds of research. Don’t ask me any more. Myself, I have yet to look at one, not that I’m resistant, I fully intend to check it all out, only I’m content with books.

Bottom line is, books are old snuggly friends. Invent some new snuggly friend, OK, I’m easy. But I haven’t seen it. And no, the paperback book trade is not in danger. Very strong market. As to hardcovers and journal subscriptions for academic libraries and the whole regime, a lot of us say, good riddance.

  

4. In the past few years, articles and blog posts (for example, at LitKicks) have appeared criticizing the pricing of books. Are books too expensive? Has this been a factor in reducing the size of the book-buying audience over the last twenty or so years?

AB: I don’t think so. I worked the floor of the Tattered Cover Bookstore in Denver over twenty years ago and books weren’t that far off in price from now, 15-30 bucks for a very nicely-made paperback trade copy that will last a lifetime on your shelf. Sometimes novice book-buyers would balk, but as I tell my students, well within the pizza budget. As to institutional “textbooks” that cost two hundred dollars, I say good riddance.

5. Staying with the same theme. Literary novels were once publishing in hardcover and then, several months later (and a spot on the best-seller lists willing), they were available as affordable pocket-sized paperbacks. However, in the 1980s this practice ceased and literary paperbacks started being published in North America as pricier trade paperbacks. Only genre fiction retained the pocket-book form. In retrospect, was this a prudent decision by publishers of literary fiction? Or should the literary pocket-book make a return?

AB: Publishers mix it up a bit to see what works. They are in it to make money, but, you know, after all. If there is a strong potential market for “affordable pocket-sized paperbacks,” as you are understanding these, then let’s hope someone chances upon that opportunity.

6. Agents now have enormous power, effectively controlling which writers get access to acquisition editors at major houses. Furthermore, agents find themselves under enormous pressure, acting as the line of first readers who have to sift through avalanches of submissions. Is this tenable over the long run? Is it good for art?  Or should large houses be accepting both agented and unsolicitied submissions?

AB: I’m a blogger. What I see are people out promoting themselves through blogs and social networks. A Tweet deck on Twitter can simultaneously post the content to one’s blog, Twitter, facebook etc. Maybe I just don’t see the people trying to get their stuff read by cold-calling publishers, but I could name a whole lot of writers who I know of from their own efforts on the internet.

7. Literary prizes have also grown in power. They have arguably replaced the glowing review as a marketing tool. But are they as effective as criticism in building a contemporary canon? After all, critics can express nuance, prizes can't. Do book prizes give the message: this books is worth reading and all these others aren't?

AB: “Critics can express nuance, prizes can’t” Oh, well, I’ll take some criticism then! Apples to oranges, two different things.

I guess that I play a part in “building a contemporary canon”; I’m really into Roberto Bolano, for example. But I don’t aim to do that, that’s just a side effect of my collectivist behavior.

The literature is like the language, it’s not the sort of thing that can or should be controlled or managed.

8. The is an ongoing debate over whether newspaper book reviews or lit-blogs provide better criticism; the argument takes various forms, though the one I've seen most often is that newspapers have made too many cuts to column inches, the quality of book reviewers has fallen, and book reviews are often written by writers log-rolling fellow writers, while lit-bloggers are not under commercial pressure nor careerist. Any comments of your own on this situation?

AB: The issue that the internet raises is authority and legitimacy. Presumably a professional critic (one writing for a newspaper or TV or a professional web site), the anchormen of yore, had passed through some filters, some kind of vetting, and so could be given some reasonable credit. But as one dog said to another, “On the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog.” And the fact is, you sent me your interview because you noticed me on the web somehow: I wouldn’t be opining here if I hadn’t just started putting my own stuff out there.

In a way it may be a good thing that people from now on will have to develop their critical skills to assess the reliability of their sources of information. Better than mental laziness. A danger is that we all cocoon ourselves in echo chambers that confirm our own biases. That troubles me. 

9. And, thinking of your own site, what sorts of changes do you foresee in it? Are blogs destined to become the new magazines? Will you start using a format (and possibly working with partners) in a magazine-type way? Or is blogging as it's currently defined how you want to keep posting work on the Net?

AB: I’ve always read novels. It occurred to me that I could keep a reader’s journal on a blog. In 2006 I set up Anderson Brown’s Literary Blog. All it was was a journal, and it still is nothing more than my report on the latest book. However the blog helped me organize it into something more coherent. Today I specialize in several areas, have an extensive blogroll, am citied in a list of Irish-American cultural links, have been reprinted in a Lagos magazine, get hits from all over the world and a steady trickle of free books, and everything is product-linked to Amazon. And there is a five-year journal discussing, I think, around 80-100 novels. Meanwhile I’m just a guy in his pajamas sitting here doing the same as always.