Books: A Wrinkle in Time

______________________________________________________________________________

A Wrinkle in Time: The Graphic Novel 
By Madeleine L'Engle and Hope Larson
2012





Available now from Islington Libraries
You can reserve this item for free here:
http://www.library.islington.gov.uk/TalisPrism/


So: the question is - when you're writing a review (or whatever it is you wanna call these - a "post" or blah) about a children's book: should you try and adopt the perspective of a child (which - I dunno - means kinda stunting your brain a little I guess) or - should you approach it the same way that you look at everything else?

I'd never heard of A Wrinkle in Time until I saw it sitting on the shelf in our Children's Library: but seeing how the back cover has a quote from big-shot James Patterson [1] on the back cover: I figured it must be kind of a big deal. And well - I mean: just the way it kinda announces itself on the cover "A Wrinkle in Time: The Graphic Novel" (like that's supposed to mean something important) I got the feeling that maybe this was a like an American thing that had failed to make it's way across the pond [2].

Speaking to a couple of American friends over the weekend it turns out that - oops: yep: that's exactly what it is. Described as "required reading for bookish teenage girls" it turns out that A Wrinkle in Time is merely the first installment in the "Time Quartet" (which also includes (and I've gotta say - these are some great titles): A Wind in the Door, A Swiftly Tilting Planet and Many Waters): so I guess these are like proto-Harry Potter books: mixed with some A Series of Unfortunate Events, a pinch of Enid Blyton and a daub of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe: you know - bookish kids have a series of adventures and in doing so come to learn a bit more about themselves and their place in the world: what could be simpler (and more fun) - right?

Well: yeah. Only for me it turns out things weren't that simple.

I mean: it's a pretty common cliché at this point that England is the 51st State of America. And speaking as a (relatively) normal citizen of the UK [3] my whole life has been absolutely saturated with every possible form of American media: I mean - I could write you a list of all the books, films and TV shows I've obsessively consumed over the years but we'd probably be here for quite a long time... (and I'm sure we've both got better things to do - yeah?). Point being: it's a little bit weird to come across something like this book (or - well: - and I should keep reminding myself of this - the graphic novel adaptation of a book) that has completely escaped my detection: it's a bit like - I dunno - finding a whole new type of chocolate bar or something you know? I mean: it's not that I want to be eating all the chocolate in the shop: but at the very least I thought I knew what the names of all of them were. But whatever - nevermind.

So - there's this book - what's it like?

Most of the famous English children's books are about discovering a secret door to somewhere: Alice and the hole in the ground, Peter, Susan, Edmund, and Lucy looking inside their clothing receptacle, Harry messing around in Kings Cross etc [4]: I'm having trouble trying to sum up the right words to explain the feeling - but there's something kind of quaint about the way that the adventures start: small, humble beginnings that aren't really about much more than tottering about the countryside and maybe having a nice picnic somewhere [5]. Walking into the pages of A Wrinkle in Time with no clue as to what awaited me inside I just kind of assumed that it would be about conjuring the same feeling: doing things on a small scale without too much fuss and bother: but if your traditional "English" children's book is a small scone with a small dollop of jam and cream on the side then A Wrinkle in Time is a mountain of ice cream and cake all mixed together and served in an extra large "big gulp" serving: and (for once) I don't mean that in a good way. Nah: it's more to say that instead of treating the world as this big mysterious thing that even if you lived to be 100 years old you'd only be able to really know one really really small part of it [6]: A Wrinkle in Time flips things the other way and ends up - over the course of it's story - making the universe feel small and the main characters feel very very big. I mean - not that's a bad thing in and of itself: but it kind of added up with a lot of other things that left me feeling pretty distasteful with the whole thing by the time I finished it - like a fly had flown into my mouth and I had to scrub my tongue to wash the flavour away (you get what I mean?).

I mean (well): as this blog has gone on and on - the more I've been interested in stories and what they mean and how the work - and all that kind of stuff goes double (triple!) for stories intended for children. After all - when you're new and fresh-faced your brain is all mushy and easily absorbent - which means that the lessons and ideas that get manage to get purchase at that point will be very much wedged in their for the rest of your life... (I could very much belabor this point and write several mini-articles: but let's keep moving on yeah?).

Because - yeah: with that kind of stuff in mind - there's a lot in A Wrinkle in Time that is - well: troubling. I mean I don't want to spoil it all for you - but the fact that there's a moment where a character is trying to think of something in order to keep herself from being brainwashed and ends up relying upon reciting the Declaration of Independence is - well - I'd say it's a little bit messed up - no? And further from that (and this is where I'm going to get a little bit liberal and tree-huggy - so you know: apologies): it's damn strange to have the one of the main antagonists be a great massive blob of evil ("The Black Thing"). I mean yeah: it makes things a lot simpler for a story just to have an evil blah and then use that to drive the story forward: but I can't shake the feeling that a way more - well - human - story would show that people aren't just bad because they're born or made that way [7] - but that rather: everyone has their reasons and "evil" is mostly just used as a stick to beat someone into silence when they don't want to take the time to understand them [8]. And then the whole thing ends (and this is very much a spoiler so erm yeah: maybe turn away now): on the idea that love is a finite resource and you shouldn't waste it on people that aren't your family: like - yeah: I think I know understand a little more about why America seems like it's so messed up [10].

But hey: even if it's morally wrong (or however you want to phrase it) - I will admit that (for that very reason) it makes pretty interesting reading. And it's whole strange science-fiction fantasy mishmash (so it's not really clear where one ends and the other begins) - not to mention the crazy seeming free-associative leaps in logic - (and - what the hell? - it's called A Wrinkle in Time (and is sold as a time-travel adventure): but there's no damn time-travelling) gives the whole thing a feeling like you're inside someone's head watching them dream. I mean - if (for whatever reason) I'd been reading the book then I would have felt been pretty irate that I'd allowed it to trespass in my mind: but hey - seeing how it's just a comic book (so: in and out in about a hour) there's no proper sense of invasion (a proper book is like a home: a comic is more like a fun place to visit - no?).

......................................................................................................................................................
[1] You haven't heard of James Patterson? Well - according to most surveys he's the most borrowed authors in English libraries (and probably most other countries too I'd imagine): and every library I've worked  in has always had about three or four shelves (at the very least) dedicated to his oeuvre. What bread and milk is to corner shops: James Patterson is to libraries: you know - he's one of the essentials.

[2] Man: I must say - I love using that expression. There's something so powerful about referring to the Atlantic Ocean (the second-largest of the world's oceanic divisions with a total area of about 106,400,000 square kilometres (41,100,000 square miles) it covers approximately 20 percent of the Earth's surface and about 29 percent of its water surface area) as a "pond." (ha).

[3] Yes. I know that the United Kingdom and England are two different things - but I wanted to avoid the boring repetition of "England, England, England" - ok? And "UK" sounded good - and whatever.

[4] Although I guess I should admit that my only experience of Harry Potter comes from half-watching the first two movies. But yeah - whatever. You're not going to hold it against me are you?

[5] Actually - well: I guess with my three examples I was hoping to set a kinda precedent of typically English children's stories - but now I consider it a little bit more I realise that it's only really Alice that fits the template that I was hoping to make: just an average nobody who accidentally falls down into a strange magical world - does some stuff - and then leaves. As opposed to The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe where the kids (sure) are nobodies are the start (well to do nobodies - but still nobodies) but then they end of being best buddies with Jesus (which is a bit much I must say): which is a touch too grand and ostentatious - which then leads to Harry Potter - where it turns out (and this is right - right?) that the main character was Jesus from the start and was just waiting for the rest of the world to catch up - right? (Right): which to me seems like small scale Englishness (as I imagine it) and more like - well - something that stems more from an American way of seeing the world ("I am so smart! I am so smart!" etc). I guess the things I was thinking of was more: Peter Pan, Wind in the Willows, The Tale of Squirrel Nutkin - that kind of stuff. But yeah - whatever. Maybe none of this makes sense (oh well).

[6] Which reminds me of this cool mini-article here: "I think the famous opening shot, seen above, contains the answer. Star Wars was big. As big as I could imagine things being. Maybe to imagine a bigger thing was in fact impossible. Maybe this introduced and thus defined the very concept of bigness in my imaginative life."

[7] And if you want to say that type of thing isn't possible in a children's story - then I would respond by recommending that you watch pretty much any Studio Ghibli film.

[8] I mean - I know it's probably not very cool to quote Russell Brand - but he wrote a thing in the Guardian recently that basically sums up my current attitude (talking about the Daily Mail columnist [9] Melanie Philips) : "When the audience – who, incidentally, make all the best points – boo her, I think it a shame. The wall of condemnation is an audible confirmation that the world is a fearful and unloving place. Like most of us, Melanie just needs a cuddle."

[9] Daily Mail columnist being the nearest thing that the world has to being employed as an actual hate-spewing demon. Obviously (but you knew that already - right?).

[10] Ok yeah: so the actual book was written all the way back between 1959 and 1960: but that ain't no excuse.

......................................................................................................................................................

Links: Based on Nothing Review. 

Further reading: Mercury, The War At Ellsmere, Stardust, The Hobbit, Coraline, Anya's Ghost, The Unwritten, Promethea, Arrowsmith: So Smart In Their Fine Uniforms.

All comments welcome.

Books: Hellblazer: The Family Man

_______________________________________________________________________________

Hellblazer: The Family Man
Written by Jamie Delano
Art by Ron Tiner, Sean Phillips, Steve Pugh, and Dean Motter
2008




Available now from Islington Libraries
You can reserve this item for free here:
http://www.library.islington.gov.uk/TalisPrism/


Most of you out there probably already know all the Hellblazer trivia already - but for those who don't - let's just do it all at once (yeah? Cool):

John Constantine was created by beardy comics grandmaster Alan Moore all the back in the mid 1980s when he was writing Swamp Thing. Legend has it that his sole reason for existing was that the Swamp Thing artists (Steve Bissette and John Totleben) wanted to draw a character who looked like Sting [1] (hey - it was the 1980s ok? Totally different time). I couldn't say for sure whether it was the Stingness of the way the character looked or (more probably) because everyone loves a good anti-hero in a trenchcoat who wields magic less like some airy-fairy mystical delicacy and more like a dirty, greasy hammer to throw at someone's face - but the character made such a big splash that the bigwigs at DC thought it would be a good idea to give him his own series: and thus was born a comic called Hellraiser (or at least - that's what it was going to be called until Clive Barker's film came out a few months before the first issue hit the stands and thus - well: we got the sightly less apt: Hellblazer [2]).

Yes - the world at large probably knows him best (if they know him at all) from the Keanu Reeves film [3] which committed the outrageous crime of recasting a blonde Liverpudlian as - well - Keanu Reeves (who is - breaking news - neither blonde nor from Liverpool) but somehow still (speaking personally) did have a small hint of the same rugged charm (there's a moment towards the end that I particularly liked that involved a well-placed middle finger that seemed pretty spot on: but - then again - I've only ever seen it once and ain't in a particular rush to ever do it again so maybe it wasn't that good after all? [4]): even if every "true" Hellblazer fan regards it in the same way as you would an ugly boil on the back of your hand that leads you to wearing long sleeves in the hope that it'll cover it up so you won't have to talk about it (which - when you consider how amazing a Hellblazer film could be [5] makes a certain sense I guess).

Ok: with all of that purged - let's get down to business:

So. I kinda got it in my head that it would be a good idea to go through the Hellblazer comics and write a separate thingie on here for each one [6]. I mean - why not right? Everyone likes a little bit of John Constantine now and again ("a working-class magician, occult detective, and con man stationed in London. He is known for his endless cynicism, deadpan snarking, ruthless cunning, and constant chain smoking" - I mean - what's not to like?) and seeing how he's been going since the late 1980s and attracted a whole host of comics writing talent [7] along the way - it's not like there's a lack of fun, weird and strange comics to choose from. Only - well - (and this has been a sticking point for a while now): the comic that started the whole thing off (Hellblazer: Original Sins) - there's only one copy available in the whole of Islington and - last year - someone took it out and (I mean - so far) hasn't brought it back (but - what the hey: I live in hope).

Having been waiting a while to start off at Part One I finally decided - oh well: let's take things from Part Two instead and maybe we can double-back on our tracks some other time. Plus - you know: mostly it doesn't make any real difference what order you read your Hellblazer's in: John Constantine is always going to be his bitter old moany self - falling head first into a whole mess of trouble and - for me anyway: the only way I've ever really experienced Hellblazer is by reading random trades here and there so I guess it's somewhat apt that things aren't completely plain sailing (and I'm sure John wouldn't want it any other way).

But I should probably just quit it with all this prancing around and blah blah blah and actually get down to it and write a few words about the book we have in question: The Family Man.

Of course (wouldn't you know it: just my luck) as opposed to the clean fresh start I was hoping for The Family Man begins in medias res with the events of Original Sins still hanging around like the smell from the party the night before - it doesn't really matter tho - it's just that seeing how Hellblazer was still just starting out: it's acting as if it was all telling the same story rather than (which I guess happened slowly over time) different installments of a seemingly never-ending franchise: I realise that I may have mentioned the X-files quite a few times on this blog (hey: what can I say? It was one of my must-watch TV shows when I was growing up) but it's like the difference between the first seasons when Mulder and Scully would be seriously affected by the stuff that they saw [8] and the later seasons (when me (and everyone else) stopped watching) when their encounters with the strange and paranormal would be treated as common-place and just part of their daily routine. The reason for this (obviously) is that when they were just starting out they had no idea / no real hope that anyone would be paying that much attention or that they would have to keep spinning out the same form of stories year-in year-out which lead them to be much more reckless with their characters and their situations (and the way that the situations impact upon the characters) which leads to the sort of unexpected storytelling that you get in: well - like you get in The Family Man. Of course - as time goes on: things start to solidify - and because people have certain exceptions - well: it becomes much harder to mess with the status quo and be adventurous with who the characters are [9]: yeah?

So: yeah - even tho the artwork is pretty much of that kinda scrappy 1980s style (these issues were originally published between 1989 - 1990): that those of you of a delicate disposition might have a tough time getting used to it [10]: but there are still places here and there where they manage to do some cool stuff (I liked the scene where they're sitting in front of the fire and the colours are all yellow and orange: I mean - yeah - maybe they just did it because they couldn't be bothered to mix up their palette at all - but still: I think it's pretty effective nonetheless). Plus (oh man) you will have to be willing to give Jamie Delano's purple prose a pass [11] or at least just hold your nose during the most particularly repungent parts. But - damnit: I'd say that it's worth the effort: there's a quote from Delano that I've seen reprinted a lot in quite a few places that lays down his motivation for writing Hellblazer to be: "...generally I was interested in commenting on 1980s Britain. That was where I was living, it was shit, and I wanted to tell everybody." [12]: and - man: that kinda of attitude and determination to wipe the reader's nose in some of the most depressing aspects of the period certainly comes through on every page: not that it's practically preachy (except for maybe the last episode in the book: but that's so surreal that I'm even sure if I could tell you what it's about apart from the fact that - you know: everything is rubbish and all people everywhere are awful) the first story in the collection (Larger than Life) is like a B-side from The Unwritten and is of a certain sort of flavour that (and I'd say thankfully to this) John Constantine never really returned to: and the main bit in the middle (The Family Man) is constructed like a really good 1980s Thriller - the type best watched on VHS: like something directed by Brian De Palma - dirty, nasty and cheap - yet still completely mesmerizing.

And - of course: the best bit about all of this - is that this is only still just the beginning.

............................................................................................................................................

[1] Alan Moore from this here: "I can state categorically that the character only existed because Steve and John wanted to do a character that looked like Sting. Having been given that challenge, how could I fit Sting into Swamp Thing? I have an idea that most of the mystics in comics are generally older people, very austere, very proper, very middle class in a lot of ways. They are not at all functional on the street. It struck me that it might be interesting for once to do an almost blue-collar warlock. Somebody who was streetwise, working class, and from a different background than the standard run of comic book mystics. Constantine started to grow out of that"

[2] Which - and is this just me? - always just kinda makes me think of a particularly devilish piece of a school uniform....

[3] Which - confusingly - was titled not Hellblazer - but "Constantine" (which - if you ask me: is a pretty boring/shoddy title for a film - but what do I know: it earned nearly $30 million at the North American box office on its opening weekend so it must have been doing something right I guess): which lead to the comics (hoping to get themselves a few pieces of that sweet and tasty money-pie) to redo the "John Constantine" above the title from thin little slender letters into big chunky bold ones.

[4] Of course the question is: who would have been better cast? Daniel Craig? Paul Bettany? John Lydon? Or - if you wanted to get meta about it - Gordon Matthew Thomas Sumner?

[5] Although - if you ask me: if you really wanted to make an adaptation: the best thing would be to make a Hellblazer TV show: I mean - looking back at the twenty years plus of comics it's not like you would have any trouble finding a decent story-line to sustain you. But whatever.

[6] Of course - if you look on the right hand side under "Books" - you will notice that there's already entries for Hellblazer: City of Demons and Hellblazer: Pandemonium: but (for the moment at least) they're barely fleshed out - seeing how they were written all the way back when my intention was just to create a big fat Hellblazer entry and stick all the books together in the same place (City of Demons and Pandemonium are both kind of one-off specials - (if you check the wikipedia page on the List of Hellblazer publications - they're listed under "Other collections" and "original graphic novels") so I figured it didn't matter that I had them buttoned off separate): but - blah blah - whatever.

[7] Including (amongst others) Garth Ennis, Warren Ellis, Brian Azzarello, Mike Carey and at one point - Ian Ranken (but we'll get to all of those - hopefully - in time).

[8] Most notably I'd say in an episode called Darkness Falls which ends (spoiler alert I guess) with Mulder and Scully held up in a quarantine facility: which is the kind of thing that - as things went on and the creators realised that they were going to be able to get more than one season out of this - the show just didn't have much time for anymore.

[9] Then again: things are a bit more complicated than I might be making them out to be: because - even tho it may become harder to wreck violence upon your characters: it does allow you to be a little bit more exciting with the types of stories you tell (which is why a lot of the best X-Files episodes (Clyde Bruckman's Final Repose, Jose Chung's From Outer Space, Small Potatoes and Bad Blood) happened in the mid-Seasons: as the set-up was solid enough that you could start to shift things around in a cool way.

[10] But then - my feeling is: that if you're reading or watching anything that's a little old-fashioned then you kinda of need to be willing to adjust your perspective just a little: it's my friends who can't take the first Terminator film seriously because the special effects are a little - well - ropey and argue that it's a problem with the movie itself - while I'm much more of the thought that you just need to be willing to relax a little and not try to hold everything up to modern standards (well: in most cases at least).

[11] I did write down some of the most toe-curling examples as I went along - but now I can't find the piece of paper I wrote them on and I don't have the book to hand: so you'll just have to venture in yourself and find the most egregious lines on your lonesome. (Sorry).

[12] You can find the original interview (with also includes Garth Ennis): here.

............................................................................................................................................
Links: Now Read This Review.

Further reading: Hellblazer: City of Demons, Hellblazer: Pandemonium, The Unwritten, Swamp Thing, Cradlegrave, Neil Gaiman's Midnight Days, Signal to Noise, The Sandman.

All comments welcome.

Books: Saga

______________________________________________________________________________

Saga 
Vol 1
Written by Brian K. Vaughan
Art by Fiona Staples
2012



Available now from Islington Libraries
You can reserve this item for free here:
http://www.library.islington.gov.uk/TalisPrism/


Comics can do anything.

Yeah - ok: sure - they can't make you a cup of tea (etc) - but facetiousness aside - (and trying my best not to sound too much like Scott McCloud) the potential of types of stories you can use them to tell is (pretty much) limitless: you know - words and pictures working together and all that: I mean - yeah - (ok) maybe there are a few stories out there that only work in terms of sound (although the only one I can think of would be Orson Welles' infamous War of the Worlds broadcast): but at least in this point of human history [1] - telling a story with pictures is the thing that we all respond best to. Which I guess is why I always end up feeling a little bit (hell - a lot) let down by a book that (on the one hand) is all real world locations and people talking in kitchens or (on the other hand) opts for the usual superheroes having fights with supervillains fare ("Take that! Evildoer!"). Like - come on! Give me something I haven't seen before. Something that pushes up against a few limits - or jumps over a few boundaries - (do I need to break out the caps lock?): GIVE ME SOMETHING NEW.

As basically (as far as I see it) - if you're a comic book writer or artist or whatever then (well) for all intents and purposes you basically have the power of god. Why then are you merely content with serving up more the same? With the entire spectrum to choose from - why is everyone seemingly content to serve up the same shade of brown?

In fact - I recently stumbled across an introduction that Alan Moore wrote a book called The Vorrh [2] that (talking about the fantasy genre) managed to hit the nail precisely on the head: "By definition, surely every fantasy should be unique and individual, the product of a single vision and a single mind, with all of that mind’s idiosyncrasies informing every atom of the narrative." Except I don't think that this is just a problem with fantasy - I think it's a problem with all stories everywhere: with not enough storytellers willing to take risks or stretch themselves past the point of the people who came before them. I don't know if any of you saw that Patton Oswalt Parks and Recreation Star Wars speech that was making the rounds on the internet last week [3]: but - if they ever made it (and hell the way things are going - I really wouldn't be that surprised if it did happen) - it would be the omega point/singularity of nerd/geek culture (and after it finished - I guess we could all pack up our bags and go home): but that's the (imaginary yeah) culmination of what I'm talking about I guess - where the greatest creative act isn't to make something new - but to join up the parts and pieces of the stories that came before (and maybe this is all just a roundabout way of moaning about the never-ending proliferation of sequels and reboots: but whatever): that's not my point.

My point is - (like I said at the start): comics can do anything.

I'm guessing that most of the people reading this have already heard of Brian K. Vaughan. In all the pictures I've ever seen of him he's wearing a black shirt and a red tie and an impish grin on his face that looks just a little (if you lean in just a bit) like he's trying too hard. But - what the hey: it looks like it's working for him seeing how he's basically one of the only (that I can think of anyway) success stories of 21st Century mainstream comicdom (and by success I mean - he's not trailed by bitter fans complaining that his early work was much much better: and he's sold out all the things he used to stand for etc etc etc). He first broke big with Y: The Last Man and Ex Machina (amongst others)- then followed that up by landing a job working as a Lost writer (jumping ship before the final season [4]) - and (after his movie projects stalled) has now returned to the comics world in a big way with Saga.

The artist - Fiona Staples - is more of an unknown quantity. Nosing around her wikipedia page it seems that before Saga she was existing on the out-skirts of the industry: doing the colours on Book IV of Button Man, doing one shots of minor superhero characters ("The Secret History of the Authority: Hawksmoor") and series that no one really mentions anymore (sorry Northlanders: but you know it's true): but having treated my eyes to the beauty of the artwork in Saga - all of that seems more like people not being able to spot the treasure right beneath their noses rather than some sort of lack on her part: putting it bluntly - the artwork in Saga is spine-tingling fantastic. At the outset I'll admit that I was a little non-plussed - it all seemed a little bit too round on the edges - like a pair of child's safety scissors wrapped up in candyfloss: but it only took a few issues before either my defenses melted or her technique improved for me to fall into her arms. The grace and simplicity she manages to capture her characters with - I mean: well - it's cool. And: in places - kinda reminds me of Sean Philips: only if he's a dog - she's more like a cat (and I don't care if that only makes sense to me). And - in fact - comparing the art in Saga to Y: The Last Man and Ex Machina - it's seems like Brian K. Vaughan has managed to find the perfect person to split the difference between the rough and ready lines of Pia Guerra (of Y: The Last Man) and the hyper-stylized / frozen in amber look of  Tony Harris (who did Ex Machina [5]): Fiona Staples manages to draw characters who feel alive and dynamic whilst at the same time - capturing them at the moment in which they're most beautiful.

And - together: well - right at the start there's this bit about what a great thing it can be when two people join forces to create something new and even tho (being English and all) it made me cringe like I was having a spasm: I've got to (begrudgingly) admit - there is magic in these pages. With both Vaughan and Staples coming together to create something that - well - feels new.

Of course - yeah yeah yeah: the basic building blocks of story is as old as time - but then what isn't you know? What's exciting tho is the way that they decide to tell that story and the fabulous creatures they cook up to make it run (my favourite so far being The Stalk): there's a feeling that only a few comic books have managed to give me - that everything is kinda floating on air and absolutely anything can happen and - hell - you know what? - I don't think I've seen such an interesting blend of science-fiction and fantasy since Star Wars (which I realise might be setting the bar a little high - but there you go).

Yes: there is more sex and violence than what you'd get from an average Game of Thrones episode [6]: but it's done with such a cheeky smile on it's face that it never really feels like a cheap shot. Instead - it feels more like a fairy-tale that never feels the need to keep things sanitized - Neil Gaiman with a few drinks inside him: holding forth whilst dressed up in a Boba Fett costume (if that helps: I'm guessing not - but what the hey).

But - yeah: totally worth the price of admission: when you've got a comic like this the only thing you need to worry out is how to get your hands on the next volume.

.......................................................................................................................................................

[1] I remember learning back at school that people used to say that they were going to "go hear a play" as opposed to go see on: as there used to be a much greater emphasis on aural rather than the visual (which is apparently why Shakespeare could be so virtuosic with his dialogue): but I don't know if that's true or not.

[2] You can read the introduction here (and - oh - hat tip to Mindless Ones): the book itself is by someone called B. Catling and unfortunately - sad face - it's not currently available from Islington libraries (oh well).

[3] I'd include the link here - but I can't find it (the one that everyone else has been using is only available to view in America). And - damnit - I can't find a transcript (oh well): summing up then - it's his crazy pitch for the next Star Wars film and how it could bring in The Avengers, Thanos and the X-Men (in fact - just look at the poster someone made: that should give you the right idea).

[4] Which obviously you could interpret in a number of ways.

[5] And - which - I would mostly put down to the fact that his technique seems to consist of taking photographers of people posing in various positions and then coping them into his drawing: with the result that - well - a lot of his artwork looks like people posing in various positions (as opposed to actually just - you know: being natural).

[6] True story: one of my friends was on an aeroplane - watching Game of Thrones on his laptop when the stewardess came around and asked if he'd like anything to drink - he looked up as he paused the DVD and said that he was alright when he noticed a strange look on her face: and as she walked away he looked back at his laptop and realised that he'd paused the screen so that all you could see was a pair of boobs. Such is the dangers of watching Game of Thrones.

.......................................................................................................................................................
Links: The Founding Fields Review, What Would Ellen Ripley Do Review, AVClub Interview with Brian K. Vaughan.

Further reading: Y: The Last Man, Ex Machina, Arrowsmith: So Smart In Their Fine Uniforms, Prophet, Orc Stain, Nikolai Dante: The Romanov Dynasty, The Umbrella Academy, Joe The Barbarian, Button Man, Northlanders, Stardust.

All comments welcome.

Books: Stardust

_____________________________________________________________________________

Stardust
Written by Neil Gaiman
Art by Charles Vess
1999




Available now from Islington Libraries
You can reserve this item for free here:
http://www.library.islington.gov.uk/TalisPrism/


Ok - so howsabout I try and keep this short (for once?).

No I haven't seen the film. Don't much want to either [1]: I mean - just judging from the clips and bits of trailers and that it looks like it's got as much soul and authentic rustic English atmosphere as a McDonald's Happy Meal [2].

I did try reading the book [4] a long while back: but didn't get very far. I think it's the thing where if your headspace is in "comics" it can be a bit much to be suddenly attacked by a multitude of words coming at you from all sides: it's like if you think you're going to watch an episode of something and then all of a sudden it's a film - and you're like: what the hell is this? And your brain can't take it and decides to flop out through your ears - you know? (see also: Posy Simmonds' Gemma Bovery and Tamara Drewe).

But - what the hey: I was stuck for something to read: this was on my "maybe" pile - so I thought what the hey: let's give this baby a go.

And: well - yeah: to be perfectly frank - it really hit the spot: and I'll tell you - spending your Thursday lunchtime with a hot soup and a nice little homemade sandwich by your side: with the first two Strokes albums on your ipod and looking up from your reading to watch the April snow drift outside - well: it's a pretty sweet set-up: thank you very much (or - like it says at one point in the book (talking about something totally different admittedly): it's "exhilarating, and intoxicating, and fine.”

The guy who does the pictures (which like I said: aren't really "comics" but are more like the type of thing you'd find in a top-of-the-line children's book from the late Victorian age: in fact - the whole book is like: the kind of thing that seems like it would be best discovered in a small library at the bottom of an sun-drenched English garden when you've somewhere in the wilds between still being a child and not quite yet a teenager: and you've been given the whole of the day to do whatever the hell you want... So you find this library: in fact - maybe it would be better described as a little hut with books inside (but whatever) and somehow you get the door open by giving it the biggest shove you have: inside it's all dusty: so dusty that you can see it floating in the air in the beams of sunshine that smash in through the windows and you nose around all these handsomely bound leather books with strange names: that are half-English and half-something else (French maybe? You can't say for certain) and then - right at the end - on a bottom shelf where there's nothing else: there's this book: and you know (even before you pick it up) that it's the book you're going to spend your whole weekend getting lost in: well - Stardust is that book: or (at least) that's the way reading it (if you're reading it properly) is going to make you feel): but yeah (sorry that got a way from me a little) the artwork is by Charles Vess (not - as I thought when I started: P. Craig Russell: but then that's an easy mistake to make right? Especially how P. Craig Russell does the art for every other Neil Gaiman comic out there....): Vess some of you Sandman readers might recognize as the guy who illustrated the two Shakespeare stories: A Midsummer Night's Dream [7] and The Tempest [8] (the final issue of the series): as good as those two stories were tho - the artwork didn't actually manage to leave much of impression in my mind which leads me to the conclusion that maybe Vess isn't cut out for comics work: especially as - well: pretty much everything that he does in the pages of Stardust feels top-of-the-line [9] with a delightful lightness-of-touch that (compared to the smashing drums and distorted guitars of other comic book artists) makes you feel like you're listening to a piano sonata or a string quartet.

(Although - I must say - there were a few annoying points here-and-there where the placement of a picture managed to ruin the surprises and twists before you managed to read them: but - I don't know - maybe that was part of the point or something?).

Of course (or maybe this is just obvious to the hardcore Neil Gaiman fans out there?) it's seems like it was written to slot alongside the Yoshitaka Amano version of the Dream Hunters: and while that's a fairy-tale story told with all the ingredients from the far East - Stardust is a very English affair (maybe I should have been listening to The Kinks or something instead?) - it takes it's own sweet ("Years passed.") time to get to where it's going: but - hey: what you rushing for anyway? Sometimes it's nice to have something a little bit ballad-edy - right? Without any frivolous modern references or whatever (see: any kids cartoon based on a classic fairy-tale: you know what I mean - right? Like how they all have a bullet-time reference or a joke about bodily functions): the nearest Stardust gets to that is when one character (when asked her name) replies: "I answer to "hey you!" or to "girl!" or to "foolish slattern!" or to many another imprecation." (and what the hell is a slattern? Or an imprecation?).

I mean: I could try and devel a little bit more into what and why exactly the whole concept of fairy-tale does and the hold that (if it's done right) it can still hold over us (it's like soup or something you know? Basic ingredients that everyone knows backwards - but if you serve and season it with enough care and love and attention: well - it hits a spot inside you that nothing else really gets close to - because (and this is because yeah - you know: you hear them most when you're a kid blah blah blah) - it hits you somewhere in the centre: somewhere in your core).

But like I said - I'm gonna keep this one short. So maybe just pick up a copy and read it yourself. "Here, truly, there by Dragons. Also gryphons, wyverns, hippogriffs, basilisks, and hydras."

.................................................................................................................................................
[1] Matthew Vaughn? Layer Cake = Yes. Kick-Ass = Ok. X-Men: First Class = No Thank you.

[2] If anyone asked me then I would have recommended they got the 80s version of Terry Gilliam to direct it for them: I'm thinking particularly of Time Bandits and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen (but then he is my go-to-guy for most fantasy adaptations (oops - pun unintended: ha)- so what the hey): and if he's busy then - I dunno - Ridley Scott in his Legend phase or whoever it was that directed Labyrinth [3].

[3] Holy moly - Jim Henson!

[4] And - urg - like with seemingly all Neil Gaiman books [5] I guess I should make clear which book I'm talking about seeing how there's two different versions: there's the Neil Gaiman and Charles Vess version (cover above) that is described as a "story book with pictures" and isn't really a comic book: but - what the hey - that's where the library shelves it seeing how it doesn't really fit anywhere else: that's the one we'll talk about (and that's the one that came first). But - just so you know: there's also a "proper book" (ie no pictures version) that was released by Neil Gaiman a few years later (I haven't read it so couldn't tell you if it has an extra words or whatever: but judging from what's written on the wikipedia page: it doesn't seem like it.....But hey - if that's wrong - I'm sure someone will show up in the comments and correct me - right?).

[5] See also: Neverwhere, Coraline, The Sandman: The Dream Hunters and Murder Mysteries: all of which are available in multiple formats (I don't know if this is a good thing or bad thing: make up your own mind).

[6] Not that I'm a total Strokes devotee or something (in fact: I'm probably floating in the same sort of orbit as Nick Southall: "Sometimes I listen to this record and I enjoy the fact that it’s just 11 great scuzzy pop songs. And sometimes I listen to this record and think it’s an ideological black hole, a vacuum, a vortex, an evil, dark, empty, hollow, selfish, greedy, solipsistic thing, the death of culture, and that it shouldn’t be allowed.").

[7] As collected in The Sandman: Dream Country.

[8] As collected in The Sandman: The Wake.

[9] This is the bit that I will mention that Vess also drew - as so delightedly described on wikipedia - "a prose-based inset that appeared in Sandman #62": which is a really good example of how weightless his art can feel when freed from the stifling restrictions of the comic panel.

.................................................................................................................................................

Links: Steely Pips Review. 

Further reading: The Sandman: The Dream Hunters, Coraline, Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere, Murder Mysteries, Gemma Bovery, The Sandman, The Hobbit, Saga, Smax, The Unwritten.

Profiles: Neil Gaiman.

All comments welcome.

Books: The Hobbit

______________________________________________________________________________

The Hobbit
Written by J. R. R. Tolkien, Charles Dixon and Sean Deming
Art by David Wenzel
1990




Available now from Islington Libraries
You can reserve this item for free here:
http://www.library.islington.gov.uk/TalisPrism/


I know I've mentioned this quote before [1] (but what the hey - it's a good quote): when the first volume of The Lord of The Rings came out The Sunday Times stated that the world would forever more be divided into two types of people: "those who have read The Lord of The Rings and those who are going to."

And then there's me. The guy that missed the boat on the whole Tolkien thing. In the house I grew up in we had these three massive handsomely-bound leather back copies of The Lord of The Rings sitting on the bottom shelf of our book shelf. I don't know - maybe they just seemed too intimidating or something? Maybe I was always more (even then) a sci-fi nerd rather than a fantasy one? (I've always thought that there's - like - a spectrum of geekdom that has Star Trek on the hard right "pure science-fiction" side, Lord of the Rings on the hard left side representing the "pure fantasy" contingent and Star Wars in the middle - expertly balanced in-between both of them. Going on that model: well - I've always been more of a Trekkie than anything else: I guess (I dunno) because it's always seemed (somewhat) more realistic: plus you know (as a philosopher-wannabe) more appealing because it's a good and interesting way to tackle and deal with stuff like moral and ethical dilemmas and stuff [2]: while Fantasy is just Wizards and Dragons having fights and stuff - right?).

But anyway: I feel like the perfect moment to read them has passed. Does anyone want to read The Catcher in the Rye when they're thirty? I mean - it just won't be the same would it? Like taking a drug when you know that you don't have the proper brain chemistry for it to work (or something). Yes I have seen The Lord of The Rings films (both in the cinema and - later - the Extended Editions (oh boy [3])): but I think that's down to the fact that pretty much all my friends at uni had the Tolkien bug - and yeah: I was curious to see what all the fuss was about and figured that it would be easier to watch the films than read the books and - what can I say Officer? - it seemed like a good idea at the time.

But then (obviously) there's a difference between sitting down to read a whole book and picking up the Graphic Novel Adaptation and when I saw this copy of The Hobbit sitting on our shelves - well - it seemed like something that would only take a hour or so to read: plus - what with the film coming up - my thinking was that it would be pretty easy to get someone to borrow it: "Oh wow! The book that's also the film that everyone's talking about! Yeah gimme!" [4].

Of course what I don't think I was quite aware of at the time when I picked up The Hobbit was that (unless I'm imagining things maybe?) is that I've actually read this comic a long, long time ago. Like - I'm guessing back when I was a young teenager or something. And I'm fairly certain that it was a library copy (not Islington - but maybe Brixton library or somewhere near to there maybe... [5]) which makes sense because (is this just me?) but as soon as I took the time to actually think about - rather than just acting on - "ohhhh gimme" instinct - this is a book that has always kinda just been hanging around on the shelves of libraries (and when I say always - well - it was first published all the way back in 1990 - so Peter Jackson had only just made Meet the Feebles - Braindead was still two years away - and if you told anyone that you thought that the Lord of the Rings would be a good idea for a trilogy of films - people would have just laughed in your face [6]). I mean - maybe it's just because I read it at a young age - but then it does seem like a good library book - it's a comic so (you know) anyone can read it, it's based on a "classic" so it has some sort of literary pedigree but also (bonus) - it's a fantasy classic [7] - so it's got elves and magic and stuff and - ooooh! - there's even a dragon!

But yeah: for any of you scared or apprehensive that this is somekind of quick fly-by-night cash-in - rest assured: even tho it's slightly dated (and slightly usurped by the films) this a comic that has a lot of respect for it's source material: it's not some BANG! SMASH! rushed-job - more like (if you're looking for reference points) a cross between Posy Simmonds (in all it's wordyness - I mean obviously they've probably cut loads (I don't know for sure - because (like I said) I ain't read the original) but there's still quite a lot of sentences bouncing around the pages) and Raymond Briggs (in it's rustic, slightly provincial looking artwork - the kind of thing you could easily imagine being drawn under an old oak tree in the summertime) - in fact a bit more of the Briggs than the Simmonds - but still: (in case it's not clear) it's a very English kinda book. I mean - yeah - that makes sense - what are Hobbits after all but Middle Englanders viewed through a particularly rosy lens [8]. I mean - all they need to do is throw Alan Partridge in there somewhere and you're done.

What was I saying again?

Ah - yes. The Hobbit. So. Opening with that oh-so-famous first sentence  "In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit." [9] and knocking on straight into the action and adventure I've got to admit that this is a pretty charming little book whose unfussy ways soon ended up winning me over. Obviously I've seen The Hobbit trailers so the widescreen (and much more gold and black) images were rattling around my mind as I read it (and at certain points I got to go: ooooh! It's like the bit in the trailer! which was very much fun for me obviously) but - in spite of that - the book was pretty successful at establishing it's dominance. Of course the first (and perhaps the main challenge) for the modern 2012 reader is that David Wenzel's version of Bilbo Baggins looks more like David Mitchell [10] than Martin Freeman [11]: drawn with a big round nose, full fat cheeks and a Dumb and Dumber-style pudding bowl haircut: he's less action hero and more middle-aged chartered accountant (I don't actually know what a "chartered accountant" is - but you get the point - right?): but only a few pages in Freeman started to fade from my mind as this strange little (almost antiquated) comic began to work it's homely magic on me.

And - yeah - it's pretty good fun. If only for the spot the Led Zeppelin references [12], the frequent use of the word "adventure!" (Wooo! Yay! Adventures!), Lord of the Rings things (the Mines of Moria? Oh - I know where that is! [13]) and finding out the etymology of the word "Took" [14] (or did everyone else already know this?). The authorial voice (which I'm guessing is taken exactly as it is in the books?) is lovely and warm and - well - grandfatherly ("I do not know how long he kept on like this." "If we ever get to the end of it." "Teaching his grandmother, teaching his grandmother to suck - ") and always ready to comfort and reassure and happy to let slip some of the stuff that it hasn't quite got to yet....

The best bit I guess is when Gollum shows up. When the book kinda switches from it's never-ending cycle of danger-rescue!-eating-danger-rescue!-eating-danger-rescue!-eating-danger-rescue!-eating and finds a strange new rhythm of - well - riddles in the dark. Just be prepared for Gollum not quite looking like the more well-known Andy Serkis version (In a word: purple?).

And - yeah - the end. I mean - I thought the story was that The Hobbit was the quick, straight to the point adventure: there and back again thing while The Lord of the Rings is the more bloated, heavy-duty epic - which means that I found myself a little wrong-footed when it turns out that the thing that you thought the book was about takes a back-seat to - well - the geopolitics of dwarfs and elves. I'm sure that there's some people out there who must have loved this sort of stuff - but for me - it was like getting to the end of a Bond film only to find out that there's half an hour of Bond sitting in the UN accounting for his actions and filling in the proper paperwork.

.......................................................................................................................................
[1] When talking about Stephen King's The Dark Tower (I think).

[2] When I applied to do Philosophy at University one of the first things we were tested on was the "Transporter Problem" (namely - if you destroy someone's body and then reconfigure all their cells at another location - are they still the same person?). As far as I know - philosophy doesn't really deal with things like Dragons or "The Problem of the One Ring" - sorry guys.

[3] Not really by choice. But like I said (Or am going to say? Seeing how it's after this footnote?) my friends at uni were big fans and so I was the guy sitting in the corner desperately trying to stay awake at the all night marathons while everyone else was doing their best Tom Bombadil impressions... (And it should give you some idea of just how effusive they were in their Lord of the Rings devotion that I'm able to make the reference without - like I've already said - ever having read any of the books).

[4] And - ok - yeah - fine. I guess also I figured that maybe it could get me some internet traffic too. What the hey - it's always worth a shot right?

[5] Yes. Ok - I admit it - I'm a South London kid. Try not to look too scared ok? We're not all Orcs.

[6] Top most successful films of 1990 (in descending order): Ghost, Home Alone, Pretty Woman, Dances with Wolves, Total Recall,  Back to the Future Part III, Die Hard 2: Die Harder, Presumed Innocent, Teenage Mutant Ninja and Kindergarten Cop. Truly it was a different world (take that Middle Earth!).

[7] Although my brain is wrinkling at trying to think of any other books apart from the Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings that could be described (by the average reader) as a "fantasy classic." I mean - the only other thing I can think of that has such wide-ranging name recognition would be Game of Thrones and that's only because of the TV show and - well - it's still too new (I mean - it's not even finished yet) to be considered for "classic" status. But whatever. Why am I even talking about this?

[8] There's that John Major quote: "Fifty years on from now, Britain will still be the country of long shadows on cricket grounds, warm beer, invincible green suburbs, dog lovers and pools fillers and, as George Orwell said, 'Old maids bicycling to holy communion through the morning mist' and, if we get our way, Shakespeare will still be read even in school." I mean - he could have easily have fitted "hobbits" in there somewhere and I'm pretty sure no one would have noticed... (Also - do I really have to spell out the link between Middle England and Middle Earth? No? Ok. Good).

[9] You want some trivia? Ok then - here's you go: "As the story goes, he was grading papers during the “summer session” of 1928 when he came across a page which had been left blank. Tolkien was an inveterate doodler on any paper or margin that was available. Many of the earlier stories in his Middle-earth “mythologies” were first recorded this way, and The Hobbit was no exception. On that blank page, Tolkien wrote the sentence, “In a hole in the ground there lived a hobbit.” This has since become one of the most recognizable sentences in all of English literature."

[10] That's David Mitchell (comedian - Peep Show) rather than David Mitchell (author - Cloud Atlas). The author version = slightly hotter. The Peep Show version = the actor that (having now finished the comic) I most wish had been cast instead of Freeman (come on! The Hobbit starring JLB Credit's Mark Corrigan! Don't tell me you're not even curious to see what that would be like? Just think of the internal dialogue before he entered Smaug's cave: "Here I go. Palms dry, mouth dry, inter-buttock area moist." Instant brilliance!).

[11] Who - sorry Martin - is someone I will always think of as Tim Canterbury from the office. (Like it says so in this salon article ("“The Hobbit” is not a hipster!"): he often stole an entire episode simply by turning to the camera such a look of acknowledged defeat that he might have been the love child of Stan Laurel and Jerry Seinfeld." (The article then goes on to argue that this sort of modern infliction is exactly the sort of thing that the Hobbit film doesn't need - while (me) - speaking as a non-fan - would love it if Peter Jackson just allowed him just the one-stolen-look-to-audience in the middle of some big massive Middle Earth battle sequence. But what the hey).

[12] So I'm packing my bags for the Misty Mountains Where the spirits go now, Over the hills where the spirits fly, ooh. I really don't know... (I'm not actually a Led Zeppelin fan - but for a bit (in my misspent youth before I realised where all the good music was) - I kinda pretended to be: please don't hold it against me).

[13] And for the next person to make the Lord of the Rings films (oh come on - you know it's going to happen one day) - can I suggest this Aphex Twin track (Vordhosbn) for the whole Mines of Moria sequence? Because I think it would be cool.

[134] As in: "Fool of a Took!" (and don't act like you didn't know that already).

.......................................................................................................................................

Links: Now Read This! Review, Kevin's Meandering Mind Review, 9A Graphic Novel Reviews Review. 

Further reading: The Dark Tower, Mazeworld, Orc Stain, Stardust, Arrowsmith: So Smart In Their Fine Uniforms, Joe The Barbarian, Smax, Rudyard Kipling's Jungle Book Stories, The Sandman: The Dream Hunters.

All comments welcome.

Books: Mazeworld

_____________________________________________________________________________

Mazeworld
Written by Alan Grant
Art by Arthur Ranson
2011




Available now from Islington Libraries
You can reserve this item for free here:
http://www.library.islington.gov.uk/TalisPrism/


Mazeworld? Yeah. I remember you. (At least - well - I thought I did: turns out I was wrong).

(This first bit is a little bit information/footnote heavy - so brace yourself): The first prog [1] of 2000AD I ever brought was Prog 994 [2] (all the way back in 1996! Holy Moly!) only 6 issues before the momentous-seeming Prog 2000 and yet (sadly) 7 issues too late for Prog 987 [3] with that super infamous cover (in 2000AD terms at least [4]) of the - well - let's say... sassy (no?) Judge DeMarco (Why am I mentioned all this? I don't know - sorry).

Before I checked I would have sworn that Mazeworld first premièred in prog 2000 (and I like I said the fact that they had got to 2000 progs seemed pretty momentous at the time - altho looking back now - it seems about as special as the all the hoopla surrounding the millennium (ie - not very)) - but (oops) it didn't actually appear until a few months later in Prog 2014 [5] (I mean - that's not important to you - but hey: it's important to me) but I guess the point is that Mazeworld is very much a part of my whole growing up thing... And (as I realised when I finished reading this book) a big part of the reason why I stopped buying 2000AD.

"Free the ways!"

Of course I didn't quite realise that when I first held this book in my hands. Instead I was all like: "Ooooh. Mazeworld! Yeah. I remember you. This is gonna be good. Fantasy and stuff yeah! (And obviously most importantly of all) Arthur Ranson on art! Hell yeah." etc. (And hey with a subtitle like: "A Nightmarish Fantasy." I mean - I defy any comics geek to read that and not feel their blood pump a little faster: because most of the time fantasy is way too nice and cosy and happy and not nearly enough like something that makes you wake up screaming in the middle of the night: but anyway...).

On the bottom of the cover it lists the three stories collected inside: 'The Hanged Man’ 'The Dark Man' and 'Hell Maze.' Now when I saw that my thoughts were - oh cool. I can finally reading the whole series! Little did I know that (and this is very much not a good thing) I had actually already read the entirety of the series and that the whole thing had just been so bad and so much of a muddle that it hadn't even managed to stain the inside of my brain and instead - had just slowly rolled down and off into the void like stale jelly being thrown at a wall [6]. Because - well: I like to think of myself as someone that has a good memory. Especially for comics back when my 2000ADs were pretty much all that I had to read in terms of things with pictures (I also used to read lots of 'proper' books too - but hey - I was young and reckless so don't judge me too harshly) so I found it a little bit shocking that I could forgot something so completely. I mean - not only the details of how the story went (I mean that seems sorta permissible)- but the fact that I had even read them (which doesn't).

But then - well - let's not mess around: Mazeworld is really quite badly written. I mean you know that cliché about how a story can feel like it's just been made up as it goes along? Well Mazeworld feels like that. Only then the person making up the story as it goes along then decides to get drunk and then gets punched in the head and then falls down a flight of stairs: it's that awful - there's just all these kinda narrative non-sequiturs and things that don't really make sense and stuff that just appears (and other stuff that disappears) all seemingly with no rhyme or reason (did the emperor and the hanged man go into the maze 2000 years ago [7] or a thousand years ago? I mean - maybe I missed something - but it seems like they couldn't make their mind up...). Plus it's sense of morality feels like it comes from an eight year old: here's something you should know Alan Grant - if someone gets an electric shock (or whatever) every time they decide to do something bad or evil or morally dubious (or whatever): that doesn't mean that they've "learned a valuable lesson" (and isn't that a South Park line?) about how it's good to do good: it means that they're no longer able to act as a free agent and - well - that's probably a bad thing (I mean - for goodness sakes: have you not seen (or read) A Clockwork Orange?). (I mean - I quite like the principle of a hero who is given no choice but to act like a hero and that seems like what the story is doing at the start - but then at the end [8]: everyone is happy and all of Cadman's anti-hero tendencies are seemingly cured: in a word? No no no no no - that's not how human beings work guys!). I mean - I guess I should have expected as much from his ever-slightly pretentious introduction ("As a reader of philosophy I totally disagreed with Plato." - I mean - who talks like that apart from teenagers?) but - well - you don't always have to be that smart to tell a good story. But - yeah - well. I guess this is what happens when you give someone free rein - sure - sometimes you might get some sorta fantastic masterpiece - but in this case - it's stale jelly.

And then there's the dialogue that is annoying in several different ways (which I guess is some sort of achievement - so well done there I guess) - first off it's annoying how no one ever answers a straight question (in response to: "Why a maze? Why a world of mazes?" which you would figure is a pretty important part of stuff you get a whole bunch of wishy-washy nonsense that almost sounds meaningful - until you realise it's just new age fluff: "The maze represents the universe... everything that is, swirling in eternity." - booooo!). Second there's the super-cheesy wannabe action movie (action B-movie) stuff: "The creeps are playing for keeps - and I've had enough of their game!" and "Heaven knows that I've no reason to love Earth - but that doesn't that mean I'll help you destroy it!" that didn't do anything but make me feel embarrassed [9] - I mean really - if your bad guy is spitting out lines like: "Fool! What are you doing? You'll destroy us both!" and you're not making an Austin Powers / Flash Gordon style satire thing then something has gone seriously wrong somewhere... [10]

Then there's the stuff that just seems - I dunno - that whole drunk, punched and falling down the stairs thing again I guess. I mean - how else can you probably explain lines like: "You tortured me as if I was a rat, or a rabbit!" - I mean maybe you think that scans: but to me - it's just bizarre. I mean - I get that the whole - "you treated me like a animal" thing! But why did they choose those two animals? And - a rabbit? I mean - I know that when people do animal testing they do sometimes use rabbits - but still... I almost want to laugh - but it's kinda in a strange uncanny valley of being too peculiar to even laugh at (No? Is this just me? Anyone else think it's a really strange little line? Come on guys...). Plus (yes I'm still going) there's way too much of people making wild and completely unfounded guesses based on nothing that you just know are spot on correct: best example: "if my suspicions are correct, it's really a map - or even a key - to wherever Cadman's consciousness has gone." (aaaargh! How could you possibly know this?) and - oh yeah (finally) - there's the bits where it does unnecessary words and pictures doubling up: so when we see a picture of Adam swinging at the end of a rope laid over that we have this helpful description: "back to death at the end of the rope" (I mean - really guys? Did you think we wouldn't get it otherwises?).

Ok. Deep breaths. Deep breaths.

I mean - it's not all bad. In fact (as super harsh as this may sound) the bad it seems to me is pretty much all the fault of Alan Grant - while all the goodness of the book stems from - yep: Arthur Ranson who (like I've said elsewhere) is totally brilliant when it comes to doing the art. I mean - I kinda feel bad for the guy. In his introduction he talks about wanted to do write a "serious" fantasy story inspired by comic books from the continent that "could be presented straight, without apology or irony." Of course I guess the problem with that is - 1 - you need to get a better writer and - 2 - yeah you can try and present a straight fantasy story - but really: if you want to create something that people are going to want to read and enjoy - then it's not really a good idea to just kinda retread over stuff people have already done. I mean - in my mind - the reason that Game of Thrones is such a success isn't because people had a need for fantasy that wasn't being previously tapped (I mean - I think we all know that if you really have the taste for it - there's a billion fantasy  books out there all telling the same old stories of dragons and women not wearing enough clothes to keep properly warm) - it's because it injected the whole fantasy set-up with well - let's just say a more adult sensibility. Right? (Yes). But if you're just serving up the same sort of things that people have already heard about a million times before (a chosen one returns to lead the rebels against an evil empire? That's the best you've got?) then - well: I'm gonna diss your book on my comics blog (and you just know that's gonna sting come morning...).

(Small-side note: but talking about rubbish old hackneyed fantasy stuff: In "The Dark Man" when they go "The hooded one! You came!" I could have sworn I heard that Hawk the Slayer whistle-trill in my head [11]). .

But yes - the art: It's super gorgeous throughout and there's a moment early on where Adam Cadman sees Mazeworld from the air that almost (almost) makes the whole reading experience worthwhile. Plus - at the start at least (before all the writing started to drag me down) I really dug Adam's look - blue one-piece boiler suit and white trainers (which I'm guessing are probably Reeboks - no?) is kinda cool. And - well - yeah: you'll discover this for yourself - but it also has some of the best panel construction such - well - forever. I mean: I can hear people moaning that it's too gimmicky - but basically: shut up. It's amazing. (Yes - the way he draws the monster in "The Hanged Man" makes it look like an angry chipmunk - but I guess you can't have everything can you?).

Like it says in the introductions: in the first stages of it's design was Mazeworld supposed to be a computer game. If that means that there was a way to enjoy the art and skip the awful tale it spins - well: I wish that they would have kept it at that. How disappointing to discover at the centre of the maze you only find.... what? A book that's pretty much not even worth the time it takes to read. Oh well. And even tho I can't remember the number of the last prog that I brought (although I think it was just before I left for university - you know: growing up and all that and putting aside childish things - I mean - I didn't want to be one of those people who was still reading comics when he was an actual adult - (ha! Just imagine!) - I'm pretty sure that this series was one of the reasons why. I mean - when it starts off - it has such great promise: and then (by the end) - well - it's just kinda leaves you feeling a little bit empty on the inside.

.....................................................................................................................................................

[1] For those that don't know - that's Tharg-speak for "Issue." 

[2] If you're curious as to what it looks like - well: you can see the cover here. (The cover artist? A guy called Simon Davis who I know best from the stuff he used to do on a strip called Sinister Dexter (something that was ripped off from lovingly based on Vincent and Jules from Pulp Fiction): but he got pretty slapdash as he went along - which each thing he done looking like he'd put less and less effort in: until it was pretty much an embarrassment (which is one of the many reasons I stopped buying it): but man - if he'd kept up the kinda quality he shows here - who knows? Maybe I'd still be reading it? I mean - I'm pretty sure that I must have brought it on the strength of the cover and even tho I had no idea about the Judge Dredd storyline (it was a long running thing called The Pit: about a sector where even the judges (who are meant to always be above reproach) were up to all sorts of no good illegality (see: Judge DeMarco) it just sums up the mean and dangerous mood of the whole thing (in fact: The Pit has been collected in two editions (see here and here) but neither one of the covers they used are a patch on the Simon Davis cover. And my other thoughts on seeing it again: what a stupid design: I mean - even tho it's part of my psyche now (you never forget your first prog) I still kinda wished that they stuck with the old design (you know: the one that they (finally) went back to) and also: what's with that stupid Dredd badge in the top left hand corner? It's stupid. Also: Only £1! Wow. Now I know what it feels like to be old.

[3] That would be this one here. (Poor Judge DeMarco. She obviously owned a suit with a faulty zip). 

[4] And I don't remember exactly how it worked that I ended up hearing so much about a cover of a 2000AD without even ever seeing it until much much much later (this was the age of back before the internet remember?): but it definitely seemed like it was a big deal. (And looking back it was obviously the publisher's idea to try and case in on the Loaded market... I mean - because otherwises: it's just titillation for young teenage boys right? And we all know that isn't what 2000AD is about - right? Right. Let's just be thankful that they went with "Unzipped" rather than: "Phwoar!").

[5] Which - seeing how I did it for everything else I guess I should show you - looked look this. (Kinda ugly no? Especially when you compare it to the elegant beauty of the Simon Davis one - but oh well...).

[6] A wall that for some reason is suspended over a void. And also: I don't quite know why I've specified that the jelly be stale (?) But I'm guessing it's because otherwise you might be tempted to wanna eat it? But apart from all that - it's a great metaphor.

[7] 2000 years ago... 2000 years ago... 2000 years ago... You know - that sure reminds me of something. I mean this whole story you were telling about a guy who was killed and then brought back to life and then it's like he's the chosen one who can save humanity and stuff was kinda ringing a few bells - but it wasn't until you dropped in that whole thing about him having last been seen 2000 years that it all fell into place. So thanks for that.

[8] Note: when I say the end - it's just the end of the first third (The Hanged Man) that this happened - so it's not a total spoiler. Also (what you thought I was exaggerating before when I talked about things that just appear and disappear for no reason?) after the first book - this stuff is never mentioned again.

[9] Although I will admit that I did chuckle at evil scientist guy: "Unethical perhaps - but when did that faze us?" (But I don't think that chuckles is what they were going for... Apart from maybe with the only semi-good line in the entire book: "Get used to it my lady. All powers come out of the use of brute force! You'll understand that better once we're married!")

[10] Oh (and!) that whole - "Don't call me the hooded one... Call me... Adam." stuff? Well - that just made me think of Kickpuncher ("Let's go film the sex scene").

[11] Although I've never actually watched Hawk the Slayer - but in the heyday of my (almost) crippling Lost obsession - I was looking up what other things Jack's Dad (or John Terry) had been in when I found this (it's "Hawk The Slayer - the best bits" and well worth the 3 minutes and 9 seconds of your time just for the bizarre strangeness - and that excellent reoccurring whistle trill that happens whenever Hawk shows up).

.....................................................................................................................................................
Links: 2000AD Wordpress Review.

Further reading: Judge Anderson: Satan, Joe The Barbarian, Button Man, A.B.C. Warriors: The Black Hole, Promethea, The Hobbit, Cradlegrave.

All comments welcome.

Books: Murder Mysteries

______________________________________________________________________________

Murder Mysteries
Written by Neil Gaiman
Art by P. Craig Russell
2002




Available now from Islington Libraries
You can reserve this item for free here:
http://www.library.islington.gov.uk/TalisPrism/


Going from that title I assumed that this was going to be a some kind of detective story starring a private eye with a dirty tenchcoat and a furrowed brow ("...and just one more thing.") - but no. But least - not in the way that you would think. Because altho the bare bones of the story that sits in the middle of this book is as familiar and old as - well - a murder mystery - except wearing a costume that most people would find a little bit - unlikely.

But - hey - if you wanted to sum up Neil Gaiman's writing style - a lot of the time he deals with pretty well-worn concepts and ideas (dysfunctional families and stuff like that) only twisted up and made new by virtue of being pinned to mythical beings from dusty legends and faraway lands (so - a dysfunctional family - only it turns out that they embody powerful forces or aspects of the universe that have existed since the dawn of time (so - yeah - it's not exactly Shameless [1])).

But yeah Murder Mysteries: a comic based on a short story by Neil Gaiman [2] (and also - according to the credits in the book it's also been transformed into - a radio play (!?) Ooh - along with this and Signal to Noise - it seems that Mr Gaiman has a little sideline building up as a radio-play-maker - would love to be able to hear it - but (alas) - I can't them on youtube [3] and my curiosity (unfortunately) doesn't extend so far as to actually wanting to actually pay money). But - sorry - the comic. Well - once again - it's been adapted by the always lovely P Craig Russell who (along with this and Sandman: The Dream Hunters and Coraline seems to be fighting Neil Gaiman's retirement from comics by adapting every children's book and short story he can get his hands on... hey: more power to him I guess - I'm not gonna be a killjoy and gently suggest that maybe he should let it go and more on to pastures new - when the result is a chance to read more books like this... But whatever).

So - yeah - I haven't actually read the little (I assume little - maybe it's a 100 page monster? I dunno) prose story that this is based on (in fact the only Neil Gaiman short story that I have read is A Study in Emerald which is a pretty cool Sherlock Holmes / Lovecraft type thing that was recommended to me by Jan from the Comic Forum - so - thanks Jan!) - this comic left me satisfied enough that I didn't have the urge: which I'd probably say is the best thing that any adaptation that can do [4]. Typically for a Neil Gaiman story (yeah? Or is it just me?) Murder Mysteries is written in a very personable first person - almost as if he were leaning other your shoulder and reading it to you as you go along (and I guess this is why I'm not really that surprised that Gaiman has gone off to make radio plays - seeing how quite a lot of the stuff that he tends to do is very concerned with the human voice and different types of speech patterns and stuff like that (I would love to give a few examples to back this up - but at the moment they all escape me: still - if you've read the stuff he's wrote - I'm sure you can think of your own [5] - like - nine times out of ten - his stories feel like they belong written down and more like they should be spoken aloud: "Sure. Tell me a story.") - with (as is his wont) lots of little brief digressions (I like it!) and little offhand thoughts thrown in to help you along ("Every seven years each cell in a body dies and is replaced." / "Memory is the great deceiver" /"People named Tinkerbell name their daughters Susan." [6])

The art is excellent - and whether it's shadows cast by overhead freeways or the wavy lines around a person's head as they get a - well - a blowjob (I'm sorry if there's any children reading this - normally I would never be so crude - but didn't quite know how else to phrase it ("oral relief"? God no)) I mean yeah - come on - P. Craig Russell always knows exactly what he's doing... (he has been around forever [7] after all - which I guess is what gives him the freedom to do whatever the hell he wants - I mean hey - yeah - you wanna adapt three different Neil Gaiman things? Go right ahead...).

I will admit that I was a little bit trepidatious when I first started - because - hey - due to the subject matter of - you know - celestial beings and stuff  - I thought that maybe it was a mistake to read something that seemed designed to leave so much to your imagination (there's one point especially where it talks about bodies that seem to glow from the inside that - sorry dude - P. Craig Russell just isn't able (and - well - doesn't really seem to try and capture in the artwork) - that left me thinking how much better it would have been if it was left unseen in say a book (or even a radio play!) but then (and this was good) there was a line about halfway through that spoke about the story having been put in a "form you can understand." and that actually - (this was implied - but what the hell): the whole story was - if you somehow got a chance to deal with it 'direct' somehow beyond actual human comprehension. And - well - I dunno - there's something about ideas which lie beyond our (puny human) ability to understand that always makes me a little bit - erm - tingly (that means I like it basically) - so that's a good: but it also made me feel better that it had almost made an acknowledgement that the artwork of the comic was just a peception of how things happened rather than - the real deal (is this all a little bit too vague and metaphysical for you? Sorry: ex-philosophy student and all that...). So. Yeah.

And also - I guess I should acknowledge that if you wanted (and if you're like me - there'sa small surge of pleasure that comes from this - yeah yeah yeah) you can read the whole thing as a Sandman prequel - not in any direct way - and it doesn't tie in with Dream or any of his brothers and sisters - but there is one character who all Sandman readers will recognise - whose driving motivations are made - a little bit more clear.

So far I've done a pretty good job of not expressly giving away what the story is about and so - to try and stay in that area and not tell you too much for those who haven't had a chance to read it yet - I will stay vague by just saying that I also enjoyed the way that the language hadn't quite developed: "There has been a... wrong thing." / "The inner fluid." / "So that's green is it?" and (I don't know why - but I really got a kick out of the description of their duties ("Advising, correcting, suggesting, forbidding.") and - last but not least - it's very hard not to fall in love (just a tiny bit) with a story where a character points at the Universe and asks "what's it for?"

...........................................................................................................................................
[1] And just in case there's one person out there that doesn't know what I'm referring to - it's called The Sandman - and you should totally be reading it already.

[2] If you wanna: the original story (with no pictures) can be found in Gaiman's collection Smoke and Mirrors and in The Year's Best Fantasy and Horror (St. Martin's, 1993)

[3] Oops - actually tell a lie: here they are! (Narrated by Michael Emerson?! (Better known as - Mr Ben Linus from Lost) Squeeeeeeee! Gonna need to make time to listen to this all methinks: and if you're very lucky - I will report back later to let you know how it went).

[4] Check out my tribulations with The Dark Tower comics for my own little case study for when comic book adaptations go wrong (and there's a great title for a TV show right there if anyone's interested).

[5] Here we go: Matthew the Raven - if you can read The Sandman and not hear his voice in your head when you read it (I guess it's somewhere in-between Joe Pesci and Martin Freeman (and how's that for a hellish mash-up?) then I just don't know what's wrong with you.

[6] Which sometimes have a habit of not actually been so disconnected from the story after all.

[7] Well - ok - 1972.

...........................................................................................................................................
Links: Biting Dog Press Neil Gaiman Interview, The 52 Review Review.

Further reading: The Sandman: The Dream Hunters, Coraline, The Sandman, Rudyard Kipling's Jungle Book Stories, Lucifer, Violent Cases, Neil Gaiman's Midnight Days, Stardust, Signal to Noise.

Profiles: Neil Gaiman.

All comments welcome.