Oh good, Chester Brown is doing ANOTHER graphic novel about how waaaaay cool prostitution is, this time all about how the Bible is actually all pro-prostitute and every woman in it was actually a prostitute if you just read it right
― like Uber, but for underpants (James Morrison), Wednesday, 17 February 2016 21:55 (eight years ago) link
He really is a creepy little shit
You've read it?
― Chicamaw (Ward Fowler), Wednesday, 17 February 2016 21:56 (eight years ago) link
Toronto (or at least parts of it) has a pretty respectful culture towards sex work and the rights of sex workers. That's a good thing and I don't think Brown is creepy for putting together two books about it. He is plenty odd for other reason though.
― Chuck_Tatum, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 22:23 (eight years ago) link
I've never really delved into Brown's work but this single line from his wiki bio kind of made me put my head in my hands
Brown began to question traditional male–female relations after he had read Cerebus #186, which contained an essay attacking the modern state of such relations.
― μpright mammal (mh), Wednesday, 17 February 2016 22:39 (eight years ago) link
ed the happy clown is like next level genius, all of which said genius was completely flushed down the toilet when he became obsessed with sex workers and started making comics about it.
― kurt schwitterz, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:03 (eight years ago) link
Toronto (or at least parts of it) has a pretty respectful culture towards sex work and the rights of sex workers.
I have no problem with that, and I do a fair bit of work with sex workers and their advocates myself, it's just the sleazy men who use them and then try to justify it all at great length with reddit-style logic that shits me
― like Uber, but for underpants (James Morrison), Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:11 (eight years ago) link
I own "Paying For It" and think it's a pretty great piece of work - very odd, occasionally funny, def unusual. The art is great. The more polemical appendices (which clearly owe a debt to Sim on some level) v much less so. Apart from Seth's riposte, which is (as usual) hilarious.
That being said, if this "graphic novel about how waaaaay cool prostitution is, this time all about how the Bible is actually all pro-prostitute and every woman in it was actually a prostitute if you just read it right" description is at all accurate I don't think I'm going to be much interested in reading it, it just sounds gross. Chester seems to have fallen into this weird developmental predicament where he figured out he couldn't function within society's traditional framework, found a way out of that, and now is on a mission to prove that his solution is actually a solution for everybody, if only we all weren't such sheeple. He resents his initial alienation, and wants to connect with others by making them go through the same process he went through - locate their unhappiness within failed sexual relations, discover how awesome prostitution is, attempt to reshape society accordingly. And you can see him grappling, in his own sort of intellectually honest way, with countervailing points of view but at bottom he seems to not grasp that there's *not* a single path to happiness for everyone, there are such things as successful non-transactional monogamous sexual relationships, people's unhappiness/loneliness is not going to be magically washed away by everyone engaging in prostitution. I don't really give a fuck what he does, I'm fine with legalizing sex work and affording legal and financial protection to prostitutes, but the proselitizing about it as some sort of social panacea is just presumptuous and creepy.
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:16 (eight years ago) link
Also Ed the Happy Clown is a masterpiece, everyone knows that right? cool
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:17 (eight years ago) link
of seth, chester brown, and joe matt, i wouldn't have predicted chester brown ending up the "sleazy one"
― Philip Nunez, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:28 (eight years ago) link
ha I am v curious to read Joe's next book whenever it finally comes out
his whole porn obsession/guilt trip seems so pre-internet/90s these days
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:30 (eight years ago) link
I'm a little disappointed with the 3-D Frank book inasmuch as I thought it was an actual new story instead of just isolated images, but Woodring is one of the few comics artists whose art books I buy so I'm not actually disappointed. And the 3-D is without a doubt the best anaglyph 3-D I've ever seen. The paper stock is thick enough that you can tap the back of a page and watch all of the individual elements in the image wobble briefly. It's pretty impressive.
― maybe my clam is just more toxic (Old Lunch), Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:31 (eight years ago) link
Booming post shakey. It's deeply depressing to me that I can barely muster up the will to read someone who was once so incredibly electrifying to me. Also, this here is a v particular pitfall for independent cartoonists, with our decades of self enforced alone time and delight in total control of our built worlds:
Chester seems to have fallen into this weird developmental predicament where he figured out he couldn't function within society's traditional framework, found a way out of that, and now is on a mission to prove that his solution is actually a solution for everybody, if only we all weren't such sheeple.
― scarcity festival (Jon not Jon), Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:33 (eight years ago) link
applies to Sim, Ditko, probably a bunch of others
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 17 February 2016 23:45 (eight years ago) link
Great post upthread Shakey.
I'm not sure about the whole "sex work is fine but speaking about it is gross" idea. Why not? There's no pressure to agree.
I think Brown has a long, long way to go before he hits Sim/Ditko levels of oddballery.
― Chuck_Tatum, Thursday, 18 February 2016 16:12 (eight years ago) link
OTM
― if thou gaz long into the coombs, the coombs will also gaz into thee (WilliamC), Thursday, 18 February 2016 16:16 (eight years ago) link
Why not? There's no pressure to agree.
it's p clear Chet wants to convert readers to his POV. "Paying For It" succeeds in spite of that polemical undertone. idk if this next book will pull off the same trick.
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 18 February 2016 16:43 (eight years ago) link
I'd say it succeeds *because* of the awkward polemical tone - I mean, I didn't like it either, but it took me to a weird emotional space as a reader, which felt like it was more interesting than if he'd made a better effort to be even-handed.
Obviously at the extreme end of that, my argument is nonsense, because you end up with something like Reads in Cerebus, where my weird emotional space was "Please shut the fuck up, Dave."
― Chuck_Tatum, Thursday, 18 February 2016 17:37 (eight years ago) link
Paying For It is trying to convince, but not convert, imo.
This is never happening, the 13 sort-of-finished pages in D&Q25 are all he's done in a decade.
― glandular lansbury (sic), Thursday, 18 February 2016 23:07 (eight years ago) link
oh you cynic
I liked those 13 pages
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 18 February 2016 23:39 (eight years ago) link
I should hit you guys up to determine a couple must-buys when I stop by the D&Q store in a few months
― μpright mammal (mh), Thursday, 18 February 2016 23:54 (eight years ago) link
post a list of everything they have in stock?
― glandular lansbury (sic), Friday, 19 February 2016 00:21 (eight years ago) link
maybe I should restrict it to "things released on D&Q or within the last two years"
it's a pretty well-stocked store
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 19 February 2016 00:25 (eight years ago) link
but yeah, I will see if I can get one of everything
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 19 February 2016 00:26 (eight years ago) link
no one said this.
chester is gross because he sees these women in a robotic inhuman sort of way. they are just there for him to fulfill his biological need, down to him not even drawing faces on them. how is that not gross?
― kurt schwitterz, Friday, 19 February 2016 00:26 (eight years ago) link
down to him not even drawing faces on them
the rationale he provides for this (primarily wanting to protect their identities iirc) makes sense on the surface but is also kind of laughable. Like, he thinks portraying them as faceless automatons is preferable/more respectful/more honest or "accurate" than just drawing them with fictionalized features. I'm sure Chet would argue against their depiction as being "inhuman" but then (as Seth notes) we're dealing with someone who does not really seem entirely human himself.
― Οὖτις, Friday, 19 February 2016 00:31 (eight years ago) link
Among D&Q books from the last few years, Michael DeForge's "Ant Colony," Jillian Tamaki's "Supermutant Magic Academy," Kerascoet and Fabien Vehlmann's "Beautiful Darkness," and John Porcellino's "Hospital Suite" stand out.xxp
― one way street, Friday, 19 February 2016 00:34 (eight years ago) link
this was my point, it's a bookshop! if you're only looking for D&Q-published stuff that's much easier to recommend on. But also, you could buy these at bookshops in your own country?
Chester sees everybody as weird automatons because he himself is a weird automaton - this is what makes the book so compelling. Hiding the women's faces out of safety concerns is one of the factors that gives the work its distinct tone - it tells us something about the author's processing of ideas, it's unsettling but oughtn't be read as hateful or wilfully reductive.
The book would be enormously worse if not for the developments near the end, and for Brown's seeking Seth's rebuttal. But both of those are part of the work, and provide essential context.
― glandular lansbury (sic), Friday, 19 February 2016 01:10 (eight years ago) link
imo the idea of Chester being creepy or just a dude who seems automaton-like is a matter of how much social deviance you accept in your peers and in society at large. There are a large number of social roles where acting that way reads as quirky to others but not threatening, but also a number of spaces where people acting in that way are threatening due to the inability to tell the difference, in the viewer, between someone who has different boundaries and someone who does not respect boundaries.
my offhand travel purchases are usually a couple books that I can toss in my smaller bag that I carry around when traveling, and honestly I almost grabbed Paying for It the last time I was at D&Q! if it hasn't been read by then, it might make it in the bag.
― μpright mammal (mh), Friday, 19 February 2016 03:52 (eight years ago) link
you should read it!
― Cory Sklar, Friday, 19 February 2016 06:12 (eight years ago) link
Hiding the women's faces out of safety concerns is one of the factors that gives the work its distinct tone - it tells us something about the author's processing of ideas, it's unsettling but oughtn't be read as hateful or wilfully reductive.
Totally.
― Chuck_Tatum, Friday, 19 February 2016 10:52 (eight years ago) link
Sounds interesting, you guys have convinced me to give that book a try
― Nhex, Friday, 19 February 2016 14:28 (eight years ago) link
it's def worth reading
― Οὖτις, Friday, 19 February 2016 16:28 (eight years ago) link
i'll cosign the recommendation. it is strange + bizarre but also compelling (partially bc of how bizarre the author is).
― Mordy, Friday, 19 February 2016 16:45 (eight years ago) link
Yeah, another recommendation here.
― if thou gaz long into the coombs, the coombs will also gaz into thee (WilliamC), Friday, 19 February 2016 16:57 (eight years ago) link
I wonder if it actually changed any ILX readers' minds in regards to sex work
― Οὖτις, Friday, 19 February 2016 16:58 (eight years ago) link
just curious
idk if it changed my mind - i went in feeling pretty neutral on the topic but thinking that legalizing it would probably lead to better outcomes and came out the same way, just a bit more certain that legalization is the right decision. i think he does make some compelling arguments - but how many ilxors really believe that we should be legislating morality?
― Mordy, Friday, 19 February 2016 17:15 (eight years ago) link
My reaction was p much the same as yours. But I was unconvinced by a lot of his ruminations on, say, the fallacy of romantic love, or how prostitution should be totally unregulated, untaxed etc.
― Οὖτις, Friday, 19 February 2016 17:48 (eight years ago) link
He certainly made me think more about it than I ever had before. I mean generally it's just not something I think about or am all that concerned about.
Congrats to Vic Fluro for making a Ken Reid joke in the latest New Avengers.
― suffeeciant attreebution (aldo), Friday, 19 February 2016 18:39 (eight years ago) link
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/f2/48/30/f24830b5c40773a4e446be710c6398c8.jpg
― Chuck_Tatum, Friday, 19 February 2016 23:05 (eight years ago) link
Zackly.
― suffeeciant attreebution (aldo), Saturday, 20 February 2016 01:29 (eight years ago) link
Has everybody read Rosalie Lightning?
― tremendous crime wave and killing wave (Joan Crawford Loves Chachi), Saturday, 20 February 2016 03:33 (eight years ago) link
no
― glandular lansbury (sic), Saturday, 20 February 2016 03:47 (eight years ago) link
Just the excerpt in Best American Comics, but it looked devastating.
― one way street, Saturday, 20 February 2016 03:56 (eight years ago) link
it hasn't been published here
― glandular lansbury (sic), Saturday, 20 February 2016 03:57 (eight years ago) link
Guys go see the Gary PAnter zines show at Printed Matter if you are in the NYC area. It's wonderful and some/most of the editions on exhbit are for sale. Very reasonable ,too, for such rare stuff. i walked away with three beautiful old books -- and I met Charles Burns as well as GP!
― Acid Hose (Capitaine Jay Vee), Saturday, 20 February 2016 04:21 (eight years ago) link
rosalie lightning's excerpts ARE devastating
― ulysses, Saturday, 20 February 2016 18:03 (eight years ago) link
http://www.darkhorse.com/Books/28-756/Giganto-Maxia-TPB
There's a preview. Hope this is self contained.
― Robert Adam Gilmour, Sunday, 21 February 2016 19:18 (eight years ago) link