Me: Because as much as I want to work on the Drifters, I'm like..."Fuck, man, I need to write stuff myself. I need to write my own story." But it's like, "Fuck, I'm so committed to The Drifters now." I have to convince myself it is as much my story and ideas as yours, kind of. Like, it's your story, but it's my arrangement and it's got my imprint on it with the comic.Since you didn't give me a straight script. I have to write my own things and dialogue at some points. I'm always torn with that. Part of me is like, "Cop out!" with this project, the other half is, "No, The Drifters is fucking sweet."
Cris: *nods* I know I've brought it up before, that sometimes I wonder/worry if I might be stifling you too much with projects like these and reminding myself that you find it just as awesome as I do, and that you would say so (I should hope) if I was being too...the word just slipped out. I've been very verbally deficient today.
Me: Nah, I feel the need to do something like the Drifters, something long term, because I need something to show for myself. But at the same time, I feel a little like, everyone must think I'm this idiot who only knows how to draw and make nice-looking pages and can't tell a coherent story for shit. It's not that I can't tell stories, I can't tell long stories. I could do a book of short WWII stories, but don't ask me to write one long WWII saga.
Cris: Trust me, I will consider it an achievement once I finish The Drifters, because look at all my other long-term pieces.
Me: The Drifters is great because it's so non-canon, and it's also pretty batshit because it uses stuff from the canon. Like Jack the Ripper in Texas with a gang of WWII soldiers who can turn into wolves.
So how do you guys feel about it? What's your opinion on collaboration? Do you like it? Dislike it? Think it's a cop out? Think it's the way the world turns? I want to hear your opinion, Kate, damnit!
Posts
Hmm...here is a Paul Pope answer...
"I prefer to write and draw my own because that--to me--is true cartooning. One person writing and drawing. Although I do sometimes like collaboration, it can be very successful. There are and have been some fabulous writer/artist teams out there."
While I can see where he is coming from, I can't agree whole heartedly. I think collaboration is good and possible, but if you purely rely on someone else's story for ALL of your projects, then I think that takes you from cartoonist to comic artist. I think. I've always wondered the difference, and I think that is it right there. I know that historically cartoonist meant an artist who did humorous comic strips. But, times have changed, and it’s not quite the same anymore. “Cartoonist” is used a lot, but I have yet to see a definitive outline of the difference between “cartoonist” and “comic artist”. I’ve been struggling for awhile to find my own interpretation at least. I would think a “cartoonist” is someone who primarily (and not to say that they don’t ever collaborate) writes their own stories and illustrates them as well. While a comic artist is someone who solely illustrates other’s works/scripts. The instant visual distinction is indie comix, and Marvel/DC/etc. comics.
However, that runs into a lot of issues. What if someone from Marvel writes their own story about Spider-Man and then illustrates it—where does that leave their work? Is it “comix” then , or still “comics”, and vice versa. I suppose, in the end, I would just go with the main work that person produces and dub them either/or.
ANYWAYS, back to what you were asking me. Yes and No. I think it’s a cop out if you spend your whole life doing other people’s stories, without any interpretation to the artwork. If it’s just straight-forward “This is what you said. This is what I do.” HOWEVER, if you become involved with the story and maybe suggest what should be drawn instead, or even sometimes telling them what should be depicted, then it’s not a cop-out. You are telling just as much of a story as they are, but in a different way. Think of all of Gabriel Ba and Fabio Moon’s work. They have published their own stories, and still do. BUT, when working with a writer, they’ll usually have an effect on what’s written, or explain to them “I think this is how the image should be done” and explaining how these images will tell the story (even without words). A good comic should let you generally understand what is happening (not all the details, of course, but very general plot), while at the same time creating mood. Writer’s sometimes don’t understand how that will work visually, and so artists have to make changes/suggestions, and essentially “re-tell” everything---ESPECIALLY if you’re not given a script, and instead a novel, or short story. So, it’s not a cop-out for you, particularly because you have to add dialogue, set things up a bit differently. I mean, think about film adaptations, right?
Basically, I’m trying to say that as long as you put your own spin on it—no. although generally I find solo work better, but that’s just because the writing is usually better. As long as you have a good writer, with the appropriate artist, I’m fine.
P.S. I realize I've been talking about him a lot but that's because I'm doing an advertisement for his comic for my Comm. Tech class, and because he's one of my artistic mentors that I plan to talk about/write about--so I'm always finding interesting info.
Post a Comment