"The" Online Comics Criticism Of 2009

Tucker here. Ng Suat Tong asked me to participate in a round-up style judging panel selecting the best of online comics criticism, and the results are now available. The other judges were Noah Berlatsky, Frank Santoro, Mattias Wivel, and Suat Tong himself. (There were a few more, including a woman, but time and life got in the way.) Each person nominated their top ten favorite pieces, all of them were thrown into a bigger list, and then each judge picked ten all over again. Those votes got added together, there were a couple of emails back and forth, a couple of votes were changed, and this is the list we ended up with. I have a tendency to assume a lot of things about the online audience for comics related stuff, so let me be clear about something: there's going to be writing out there that was as good as these articles, reactions & critical takes, work that this small panel of people will have missed. There's no way to be all-inclusive in a short judging process, even when you're dealing with something like comics, which has a pretty small amount of writing surrounding it in the first place. These were some of what a few people who don't agree on a lot of things thought were pretty fantastic, and while the lack of inclusion hurts the overall, it shouldn't hurt these writers.

The Top Vote-Getters

1. Robert Alter on Robert Crumb's Book of Genesis (Scripture Picture)

2. Joe McCulloch on J.H. Williams III (A Review of Batwoman in Detective Comics Focusing Mostly On The Art)

3. Tom Spurgeon on Return Reading

4. Eddie Campbell on Will Eisner's PS: The Preventive Maintenance Monthly

5. Tom Crippen on the Age of Geeks

6. Dirk Deppey on Paul Levitz (The Man Who Couldn't Shoot Straight)

7. Andrew Rilestone on Watchmen (Who Sent the Sentinels)

What follows are the pieces I voted for in the final round--as you can see, there's some crossover. There's no order of preference to this list. The asterisks denote an article that was in one of my original nominations.

Some Other Nominees

1. Eddie Campbell on Exit Wounds

I liked this article a lot, and I stubbornly stuck to voting for it even when it became clear that everybody else had jumped ship for the PS Magazine piece. I don't cotton much to the idea that the best of arts criticism is produced by artists themselves, god knows that artists can be as poorly read as the never-does-nothing blogger, but Eddie Campbell's writing about comics has always struck me as one of the best things about the internet. I don't know if the guy would have been willing to take the necessary steps to get his occasional reviews or reaction pieces into print, so it's nice to see that he's utilized the ease-of-blog-publishing to put them out there.

2. Marc Singer on Final Crisis*

Marc's article on Final Crisis, along with his extended explanations in various comment sections at the Mindless Ones, took a frank, intelligent look at one of the most popular comic blog topics of the last year. Final Crisis blogposts tended to be associated as blanket condemnations or Church of Morrison paeans by people who didn't read them (or just didn't understand what the individual was writing), but considering the sheer amount of them, it's not hard to grasp why people eventually grew exhausted of reading about the comic. Singer was able to talk about the comic (negatively) without devolving into reactionary fight-posting, and his post was a high-water mark for super-hero related criticism. It doesn't change the fact that one probably wouldn't get much out of his post without foreknowledge of the series under discussion, and it doesn't negate the fact that a DC event comic got more attention than it deserved, but it did make the reading experience of Final Crisis better than it would have been on its own. There's a lot of merit to be found in that.

3. Derik Badman on Rubber Blanket*

I always felt bad that Derik Badman participated in a blog cross-over that I was involved with, because I can't imagine a universe where Derik Badman would be happy that he wrote something as intelligent as this only to find out that he was going to have it linked here. But he's not on here out of sympathy, he's on here for the same reason that the Eddie Campbell piece is--because after I read this article, I went into the moving boxes until I found Rubber Blanket, read it, and then read Badman's piece again. Badman's a unique writer, one whose taste can go in a wholly different direction than my own, and for what it's worth, that's why I find his writing about comics so valuable. Disagree or not, he brings an informed perspective tangled up in what seems to me to be a group of specific hopes and ideals. Anything he has to say is worth paying attention to.

4. Joe McCullouch on Detective Comics*

Joe was going to be a part of the judging process, but I think the rest of us all emailed Ng Suat Tong and said that either Joe had to go, or we had to be allowed to nominate a fellow judge. I originally nominated his articles on Winter Men, King Smurf, and this one. I don't think there's any question who would've won best overall person who does this online work. Some people's eyes roll regarding Joe's word count--you know who you are, guy who doesn't read blogs--but those people's lack of attention denotes their own failings. The reason why Joe's lack of limitation pays off can be found in King Smurf, his two part series on Manga, and, of course, in his Savage Critics post on J.H. Williams III. A lot of nice things are said about the guy regarding his criticism, but even if you take that out of the equation entirely, you're left with his skill as a researcher, the range of his historical knowledge. Beyond what happens with Batwoman and Greg Rucka, the Savage Critics post details a close reading of an artist's career in an artform where the historians often double as fannish hagiographers.

5. Abhay Khosla on Scott Pilgrim*

If there's somebody out there trying to plumb motivation, they might think that Abhay's article about Scott Pilgrim is on here because it's one where Abhay tilts serious more than he tilts funny. They'd be right. The tendency with Abhay is to either love him completely, or to mention him with a disclaimer--"I think he's great sometimes, other times I hope he dies". Picking one of his more "serious" pieces was done in hopes that it would circumvent that reaction, although I'm not assigning any of those feelings to the other judges. I'm an Abhay fanboy, I make no apologies for that. This Young Neil focused review was one of those articles that all of the comics internet seems to clamor for--a pointed look at a popular piece of entertainment, one that asks whether the entertainment has a deeper, tangible subject underneath--and it was as whip-cracked sharp as any of Khosla's writing ever is.

6. Robet Alter on Genesis*

I was surprised to see how popular this article was with everybody else, I'll admit that I felt like it was written just for me--a nerdy guy obsessed with religion who couldn't stand reading the Book of Genesis and felt lost as to why, beyond "it's boring". Alter's piece was unique amongst Genesis readings, coming from an unexpected location--Alter's the man responsible for the Biblical translation that Crumb used for his work--and yet it burrowed deep into Crumb's undeniable skill as much as it nailed where Genesis failed. Suat Tong described it as "very close to being the definitive article on Crumb's Genesis adaptation", and I couldn't agree more.

7. Dirk Deppey on Paul Levitz

Dirk's piece exemplifies a specific aspect of the Internet's delivery of criticism: temporality. While the hours following the Levitz resignation certainly included a bit of "finally!" cheerleading in various comments sections at the more news-focused internet sites, it was when Deppey's Journalista entry arrived with "This is a good thing, full stop" that an actual discussion started. Anything--hell, everything--on the internet is immediately met with vitriol and complaint (see the comments section for Dan Nadel's common sense request for art credits at Mocca's Archie show for a recent installment). But Deppey's brief piece on Levitz--one that focused on facts over nostalgia and friendliness--wasn't just a giggling Fuck This Guy. It gave the discussion substance, it gave it perspective, and it directly charged that Levitz--for all his accomplishments--had been in charge of a business he was no longer qualified to handle. If comics were a big enough industry for it to have its own trade magazines, it's hard to believe that essays weeping over his retirement would've filled their pages. It was Deppey's argument that best explained why.

8. Tom Spurgeon on Re-Reading

Spurgeon would've made a great judge, but he makes for a better candidate. This article, which could be mistakingly taken for one of those "Various" links that Spurgeon posts whenever somebody talks about a bunch of randomly selected comics, is one of the best pieces he put up last year, and one that's definitively about one of the most interesting subjects comics can discuss: the construction of the personal canon, and the "why" behind the chunks of comics that form that canon's foundation. While he glances alongside the subject, the question that it inspires--Which comics do you find yourself returning to most fervently, be it for personal or intellectual hungers--is one that, when answered honestly, is always fascinating.

9. Andrew Rilestone on Watchmen*

The first few times I'd heard about this piece, I made it about two pages in before deciding it wasn't for me. But after Mattias Wivel's last minute push, I went back and plowed through all sixty pages. The introduction still isn't my thing, but behind those initial pages, Rilestone distills a massive amount of analysis, one that details not just why the Watchmen movie sucked--which it fucking did, holy shit--but why Watchmen remains worth talking about still, even after it's become the worst recommendation for first comic ever. Besides that, Rilestone's usage of the internet to make what is, in effect, a free sixty-page book, deliberately stylized in a form that profit-hungry publishers would never take to, points to a direction for future on-the-side hobby writers. Leigh Walton's dream of a comics-focused 33 1/3 series will probably never be realized in full Barnes & Noble fashion, but maybe, just maybe, the internet could provide a suitable .pdf focused alternative.

10. Amy Poodle on Blackest Night*

There was another article on the Mindless Ones that was in my original pool o' nominees, Zom's piece on Daredevil Born Again, but it was Amy Poodle's "I've seen Superman having sex and it wasn't very nice" article that best handled a subject that's been batted around for years now: grits, glitz & guns. Part of the problem with criticizing DC's comics for their ultraviolence is that the attitude is often brushed past as being a part of some prude's response, that the criticism stems from people who just can't get into grime and ugliness, and those complainers should stick to kiddie's books and Morrisonian time festivals if they're so irritated when a character named Red Arrow gets his arm ripped off. Amy's torrent of weirdly capitalized complaints shouldn't be mistaken for a rant, though. Like a lot of negative, bile-filled criticism, Poodle's incredulous response isn't about a fan being mad, it isn't a red-faced typing fiesta of catharsis, what he's trying to nail is this: we love violence, we love suffering, and we love action, and we want to like you. We want to like you so much. And if you aren't going to meet us halfway, that's fine, life will go on. But why do you have to sit there masturbating into a diaper?

Endless Amounts of Equivocation

These aren't the original ten nominations I sent in, but it's pretty close. One of the judges nominated my wife's Power Girl review, another judge voted for it as well, which I thought was really nice. I asked her if she wanted me to vote for it myself, because I thought that was a pretty severe conflict of interest. She laughed pretty hard and then said "What? Of course not!" It bugged me that there weren't any women in my final top ten--there were a few female candidates on the list of nominations--but I wanted to hew as close to honesty as I could, and when I found myself staring at a list of ten dudes, trying to figure out which one I should cut just so that I could get a woman on there, I gave up. I know that I think women can write as well as men about comics, and that they can be just as interesting. If anybody honestly believes I think otherwise, I'm not going to prove them wrong by spitting out some names. Sometimes you have to be your own barometer. I hope it's obvious why each of these were picked.

-Tucker Stone, 2010

Comments

[AERose]

huh, I didn't know Paul Levitz resigned. Go figure.

[Sharif]

Is there any offline comics criticism anymore?

Tucker, thanks for the links. I've been lazy lately with tracking this stuff down.

- Sharif

[Nathan]

So THAT's Jog's real name? Good a name as any.

[bobsy]

Mr. Stone, I don't really want to do this because, as you know, I love you. But I have to do this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qAJxSzZIM0

[Tucker Stone]

All good, you beat me to it. I saw it too. Nina refuses to acknowledge, but that's her job.

[Marty]

I don't get it.

[Kenny Cather]

There's a certain irony in criticising criticism. But I'm becomming less and less interested in criticism because I'm more fascinated with the reviews on Amazon. (One of my favorites on there are the one star reviews of the diary of Anne Frank.) That being said, this was well written, but there's a degree of what's the point for me. A lot of this stuff is the same names giving each other a handjob, but that's to be expected. But who's really reading that much comic criticism anyway? And what are we doing with it?Sometimes I feel like it's mostly guys like me - bored white collar types who are trying to kill a few minutes at work. Maybe I'm just too jaded anymore, because I feel like I see the same things being said over and over and nothing seems to change. The corporate, work for hire stuff is still dying a slow death and the personal works from people who feel compelled to create are still the best.

[Matthew J. Brady]

Damn good choices here; I love how much great criticism I can experience these days.

And not to get all circle-jerky, like Kenny is talking about, but if I was throwing out nominations, I would point out Jog and Tucker's back and forth series on every goddamn one of the DC/Humanoids books, Tucker's ultra-completist look at Brian Azzarello's career, Noah's posts on superhero and gender and his series on Marston's Wonder Woman, some of Jason Thompson's manga articles for Io9 and Comixology, and probably plenty of other stuff, even if I can't come up with any more off the top of my head right now. The comics internet is a cool place.

[Zebtron A. Rama]

So Tucker's real name is Pat Ford?

[DerikB]

"he brings an informed perspective tangled up in what seems to me to be a group of specific hopes and ideals. Anything he has to say is worth paying attention to."

Thanks! (Though I wonder what you think my hopes and ideals are...)

And no, I was not annoyed to link here. Hell, I'm sure you get a lot more readers than I do.

[Kenny Cather]

Matt, you know how I feel - you're the best out there. But yeah, you have a good list there, too. What I was addressing last night (from my iPhone while falling asleep) is when a group of critics gets together and calls each others' critical pieces the best out there, it's kinda like - yeah, that's about what I expected.

I was thinking about this more this morning, and I guess my biggest problem is in trying to figure out what all this criticism is leading to. One of my best friends keeps talking about how comics *needs* academic-level criticism to begin to be taken as a serious art form. OK, I can get that, but I don't think we're there yet. I think it's going to take a better integration of schools like Ohio State and it's Cartoon Library and Museum with the criticism out there.

But, like, I don't think the creators out there are paying attention. Anecdotally speaking, I've begun working on my own video game. I'm not reading any video game blogs looking for worthwhile video game criticism, I'm just making it according to what I like. My goal is for my friends to like it, too. Oddly enough, when I talked to Kevin Huizenga the one time I met him, he said he had the same approach to his comics. He just does what interests him and doesn't bother reading comics criticism.

I dunno, maybe I need to form some of these ideas into actual thought out talking points rather than my stream of conscious ramblings....

[sean witzke]

Shut the fuck up, Kenny.

[Abhay]

"I'm not reading any video game blogs looking for worthwhile video game criticism"

You might have missed http://kafkaskoffee.com/junk/Platform.html then.

What engine are you using for your game? Unreal, Unity, Torque, etc? AGS? Rockpapershotgun's been running an interesting series where they've been making their own game using Unity, with zero prior game-making experience. All of the engines becoming publicly available at the end of the last year was interesting, a very interesting development.

Also: thanks. Also: Jog's King Smurf thing was robbed!

[AComment]

I don't think comic criticism blogs should be allowed to communicate with one another

It's just like all cultures of critique for all artistic media; the criticism might be thought provoking or well-read or structured or offering a new perspective on old material

Once the circle of critics passes a certain point it will be large enough to enclose and invariably devolves into a parallel, parasitic secondary forum besides/below the forum of the medium itself. And that is horrible

Speaking of what's important in the world, how about that Haiti, huh

[Kenny Cather]

Sean, I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm just trying to open up a discussion about what the role of on-line comic criticism is. I mean, if I thought it was worthless, I wouldn't bother coming here or reading any of this.

Abhay, I'm actually making my own engine from scratch. Originally, I was going to clone the Legend of Zelda, but then I got to thinking about how the movement of sprites across the screen is represented in code and I'm starting to diverge a lot from that original plan. To tell the truth, it began as an exercise to strengthen my C# skills, but it's really grown into its own thing. What's weird to me is how much I'm starting to appreciate different approaches to literature as a result. Like, I know both you and Tucker are fans of Pynchon, but I was never really into him until I began working on this and thinking - what can I twist in my project? So, now I'm reading Gravity's Rainbow just looking for ways Pynchon went off the beaten path and did different things. I probably wouldn't have given any of this a second thought had I not been reading writing from you, Tucker, Matt, etc.

But thanks for the link, Abhay! I appreciate it because I'm flying completely blind on this.

Anyway, I'm not trying to imply anyone is wasting their time writing comics criticism, I'm just asking where it's going and what is the role going forward.

[Kenny Cather]

OK, so, truth be told, I *just* clicked on Abhay's link. I thought it was going to lead to the Rockpapershotgun thing. Instead it's a game and it's pretty abstract. My game is hopefully going to be a little less abstract, but that's if I can ever get it working! ^_^

[Abhay]

"I'm actually making my own engine from scratch"

Wow-- I only know enough to be stupid, but that sounds pretty impressive. I don't know if this will "ruin the fun" for you (and sorry if it does) but you may want to check out 2dboy's rapid prototyping framework (http://2dboy.com/2009/05/27/rapid-prototyping-framework/)-- they did that game World of Goo? I don't know what a rapid prototyping framework is, exactly-- but maybe it's something helpful...? Good luck. Also: comic books.

[AERose]

"Sometimes I feel like it's mostly guys like me - bored white collar types who are trying to kill a few minutes at work."

You feel like that because that is exactly what it is.

Jesus it's just words on the screen. Either you think it's worth reading or you don't. It's not that complicated.