THE BABY AD

I liked this ad for Pet Evaporated Milk (above) so much that a few years ago I thumbnailed an animated version of it just to see what it might look like. Some of the mother drawings are terrible and I was tempted to redraw this before posting it here but the old drawings have the virtue of being done and that counts for a lot. Anyway thanks to John K whose drawings of my kids inspired this. John draws the best babies ever.

GWEETINGTH ART LOVERTH! (Part 2)

A day at the art museum with Uncle Eddie! We don't stand on formalities here, let's plunge right in!

Here's (above) Gainsborough's "Blue Boy." Cartoonists love it because it's the ultimate depiction of a sissyfied Lord Fauntleroy-type. The painting wasn't based on the Fauntleroy novel, and the boy in the novel wasn't a sissy, but the public remembers him that way and who am I to dispute it? Anyway, this painting and I have history.

One halloween I went out and bought a Fauntleroy/Blue Boy suit. I raced home with it, chuckling all the way, thinking of all the gags I could play with it. Breathlessly I put it on in the bathroom, carefull not to look in the mirror till the ensemble was complete. At long last I finished adjusting the lace collar, put the hat on, and proudly stared into the mirror, expecting to erupt with laughter.

Well... it was a looooong look and I felt like doing anything but laughing. I struggled to identify the emotion I was feeling. To my surprise it was...no use trying to hide it...violence. I wanted to hit the figure in the mirror. I couldn't figure out why. I wasn't a gay-basher in real life, why the sudden impulse to destroy? Puzzled, I walked into the living room to see what my family thought. I thought I'd get a laugh from at least one of them. Instead they all turned white with horror. My wife finally said in a tembling voice: "Eddie, that suit...it makes me want to...to hit you." That did it. I packed up the suit and retired it.

I'm convinced that what I felt had nothing to do with resentment against gays. Even gays would have wanted to hit the person in the mirror. The suit is simply the most potent lure to violence ever created. It would have turned Ghandi into a bully. It just has bad juju.

Moving along, here's (above) the "Mona Lisa." I have to say that it looks funny to me and I sometimes wonder if that was Leonardo's intention. I thought that seeing it in person might give me an insight but when I stumbled across it in the Louvre it was roped off, covered with glass, heavily guarded and surrounded by the backs of tall tourists. I couldn't see a thing. Ah, well.

Here's (above) the Venus di Milo, beloved by cartoonists everywhere because they're always trying to think of dirty things her arms might be doing. Of course Venus isn't the most revered scupture. That honor belongs to the plaster hood ornament-type figure that you always see on pedestals in the homes of the cartoon rich. I wonder if that scupture ever really existed. It looks a little like a famous black Donatello (or is it Cellini) figure but that's not quite the same.

On this wall (above) we find "Whistler's Mother," another cartoonist favorite. Boy, she keeps a clean home! It always strikes me as funny when people sit with their shoulder against a wall even if it's in a reataurant. I mean the natural thing is to sit with the wall at your back. How odd it is to press yourself against a man-made cliff with all the pictures on one side diminishing in railroad perspective infront of you.

Last but not least, Grant Wood's "American Gothic." You can laugh at this picture but it'll be around when all of us have turned to dust. There's something so primal and funny about it. It's how every adolescent regards his parents, how every writer regards his editors, how every employee regards his boss. If you're a painter, and all you want is to be remembered, then pick a primal emotion and depict the ultimate distillation of it.

SKETCHES

Some doodles from a video tape. I meant to draw more but I'm sooooo sleepy!

MY FAVORITE NFB CARTOONS

These National Film Board films from the late 70s and 80s are among my favorite cartoons of the last several decades. It's hard to believe now but there was a time when Canada was poised to take over the cartoon industry. Why it didn't happen would make an interesting book. The creative people were there but business mysteriously failed to recognize and support them. Why? I can only guess. As time went by a lot of NFB people were absorbed into mainstream TV and a great opportunity was lost.

"Get a Job" (above) was done by Brad Caslor who I'm told has since renounced animation and is now a live-action editor with an interest in radical left politics. People say that the Job film nearly broke his back. It was an enormous undertaking for one man and his friends to do and the film board subsidy wasn't enough to feed a mouse. When he finally dotted the last "i" in 1985 he swore "Never Again!" and turned his back on animation. Too bad! His own style was great and the Clampett influence certainly didn't hurt.




Here's (above) "The Cat Came Back" (1988) by Cordell Barker.




Here's (above)"The Big Snit" (1984) by Richard Condie. Condie's doing 3D now but I like his old 2D stuff better. His last film may have been "La Salla." You can see a clip from it on the NFB site.

WHY ARE KIDS SO SURLY?

Boy, teenagers are a surly lot! I should know, I was a surly teen myself.

I grew up with my grandparents who in many ways resembled Archie and Edith Bunker from the famous TV series. My grandad was a lot bigger and meaner than Archie but he had a similar attitude about life. During the whole time I was growing up he never said a kind word to me. He either yelled or maintained an icy silence. My grandmother was kind-hearted, sentimental and a little bit ditsy, just like Edith. She did like kids and lavished loving attention on me even when I was a surly teen and probably didn't deserve it.

Now I was a cute, obedient kid when I was young but somehow I turned into a surly teenager. I communicated with my grandparents through an inch-wide crack in my bedroom door and showed signs of being insufferably bored and restless whenever they tried to talk to me. I ascribe it to hormones but who knows what the real reasons were? Maybe I felt justified for being rebelious because my grandfather was such a Type-A and my grandmother was so suffocating.

Fast forward to the the present. I have college-age kids of my own who were in their turn surly to me (the kids in the photos aren't mine, I got the pictures from the internet). Don't get me wrong, they're not like that now, and they were never as bad as I was, but when they were 16 I only knew them as eyes who appeared through a crack in their bedroom doors and said, "Whaddaya want?" It's a shocking example of karma. I snubbed others and later became the snubbed.

Anyway, here's the really interesting part. When I grew up and my grandparents had passed away I found out the truth about my grouchy grandfather. It turns out that he was all worn out from working a lifelong job that he hated in order to provide a home for my Dad and his brothers and sisters. He just wanted a quiet retirement. He was always grouchy even when he was young, but he raised his family well and they all became effective adults. When I was dumped in his arms as a baby he was crest-fallen. He could have sent me to an orphanage, I'm sure he thought about it, but he didn't. Out of a sense of duty he kept me and it made all the difference.

Now my grandfather didn't like kids, not even cute ones like me, but he really didn't like surly teenagers. It must have really grated on him that I did minimal chores, resisted any kind of responsibility, kept all the money I made from kid jobs, ate his food, wore the clothes he bought, hogged the TV, snubbed him at every opportunity, and never once thanked him. He didn't like me but he persevered through this abuse every day because he thought it was the right thing to do.

As a consequence I grew up in a nice neighborhood, went to a nice school and had nice friends. It could easily have been otherwise. The grouchy, icy-kid hater I grew up resenting turned out to be a massive benefactor. Sounds like the kid and the convict in "Great Expectations" doesn't it?

So there it is: I owe everything to an irritable grouch who didn't like me, and he died before I could acknowledge it. Sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night and can't get back to sleep for worrying about it. My message to surly teenagers and ex-teenagers is....buy sleep insurance by forgiving your parents their faults. Forgive them 100%, meaning that you'll never again even think of their past mistakes. You can get mad at them for what they do next week but never again for anything they did in the past. You simply don't have the perspective to see those past events objectively. Forgive them, thank them, help them if they need it, then carry on with your life unburdened with surliness.

THE ORIGIN OF COMIC STRIPS

Here, so far as I can tell, is the origin of the modern comic strip. Caveat: take this with a grain of salt; I'm no expert on the subject and I might have over-simplified things.

Well, you could argue that it all began with Daumier (example above). Sure there was Hogarth, Cruikshank and others but Daumier was different. His lithographs weren't just beautiful and funny, they retained the fluid feel of the original sketches. Not only that but Daumier was a famous easel painter and that bought a lot of credibility for his cartoons. Cartooning was considered a low-class activity in Daumier's time and his fine art reputation did a lot to make it acceptable to the middle class.


Success always breeds imitators and Daumier's imitator was a guy named Cham (example above). Cham got his foot in the door by offering simplified Daumier-style drawings in a series for the same price that Daumier got for just one picture. Cham might have been a weasel but he did help to popularize the idea that cartoons should tell a story using multiple pictures.

Cham was so successful that he inspired a German named Rodolphe Topffler to try his hand. Topffler used Cham's serial panel technique but drew the characters in what he called the "outline method," a technique that didn't require Daumier's painterly tones and shadows. I don't know if Topffler was an aristocrat but he seemed to want the public to think that he was. His outline method was executed in a deliberately crude style so that it would appear that he just dashed them out for his own amusement and had no thought of making money with them.

Back in France, Dore saw what Topffler was doing and approved, only he thought the outline method worked better if the characters were a bit more realistic and were carefully inked. Dore wasn't very fond of the serial picture method. He preferred big, Jack Davis-type crowd scenes like the one above.

Back in Germany Wilhelm Busch (example above) combined the best ideas of all the artists I just mentioned: Daumier's belief that cartoons could be fine art, Cham's multiple panel idea, Topffler's outline technique and Dore's clean-up theories. Busch was the first artist to make a good living exclusively by doing funny panel cartoons. People say he was the first truly modern master of the comic strip. After him comes the great German-American newspaper artists like Dirks, the creator of "The Katzenjammer Kids." You know the rest.

A few questions remain. Where were the English while all this was going on? Why did the creative torch pass to the United States? Who invented the modern version of the word balloon?

BE BACK SUNDAY!

THE ALL-TIME BEST PALMISTRY BOOK...LOST!

A few weeks ago I read part of a palmistry book, not just any palmistry book but a really neat one that emphasized the horrific aspects. It was full of dire warnings lest you ever encounter someone who has airspaces between the bottoms of their fingers (a serial killer) or fourth fingers longer than the third (chronic misfits). What a find! I thought it would be a great subject for a blog!

Unfortunately in an addled state I returned it unfinished to the library to avoid paying a ten cent fine. Now I've recovered my senses but I can't remember the name of the book or which branch I got it from. Too bad! Anyway, I'm not likely to get it back any time soon so I thought I'd post the doodles I did while reading it. Here they are....

MY ANALYSIS OF THE "NAKED CITY" CLIP

Alright, I watched the chase clip ("Naked City," above) again and here's my very tentative analysis....

The villain represents evil, an evil that had successfully hid itself inside the body of the city, but which is now isolated and squeezed out into the outside world. I love the opening shot: the evil demon is now isolated against the huge abstraction of the white billboard. He'd like to ferret back into the city again but he can't, it won't accept him. He runs into an arcade of some sort but the crowd goes about its own business and offers him no shelter. He adjusts his hat on the way out but I like to think that he's tipping his hat to the ladies, pathetically trying to ingratiate himself, but that no longer works.

On the sidewalk we track along with him as he takes big, confident strides down the streets. I LOVE tracking shots like this! That technique helped to kill film comedy but it was a big shot in the arm for drama. Now we see evil in it's full glory, confident and contmptuous of the human beings surrounding it. But he has to stop to pretend to look at a tie...maybe he's not as in control as he thought. A policeman rudely stops him in his tracks. The humans have the upper hand! From this point on we think of him as a fox frantically fleeing the hounds, his doom pre-destined.

He enters the enclosed stairway leading up to the bridge, a Joseph Cambell-type symbol for gates of Hell. The gates are guarded by a dog which bites him...more Cambell! He shoots the dog and runs up onto the wide bridge walkway. People run out of his way, everybody knows he's evil now. The music is frenetic! In what I consider the best shot of the film we see him running away from the distant city down the surreal landscape of a vast, concrete runway. The sheltering city is closed to him now. The fool thinks he can escape into Hell!

Well, the clip ends there, just about. That's my take on it.

NAKED CITY

One of my favorite 50s crime films is "Naked City" starring my namesake Barry Fitzgerald. The brilliant 15-minute opening narration is unavailable on YouTube but I thought I'd put up a couple of clips from the long chase sequence at the end.


The half-minute clip above is the from the playground sequence where a cop asks a kid if she knows where the villain lives. It's here because it illustrates how important it is to pack a live-action film (not an animated one) with extras. If you're making a film, even an amateur film just for fun, cram every relative and friend you can find into the background. And use deep perspective when it fits. Don't shoot everything against a wall! Film teacher Bruce Block has some interesting opinions on this subject but that's a topic for another time.





Here's (above) part of the famous chase scene, made more famous by the lengthy discussion of it in the Karel Reiz book, "Technique of Film Editing." A whole generation of filmmakers learned their craft from this book. Don't rush out to buy it because there's probably better books on the shelves now.

I'm dying to try a commentary on a few scenes but I'm sleepy and it would take more thought than I can give it now. I get the feeling that there's an interesting sub-text going on but I can't figure it out what it is. OK, the city's like a character and the villain's like an animal running away from tormenters, but there seems to be more than that here. What do you think?

WHAT WOMEN TALK ABOUT WHEN MEN AREN'T AROUND

Magnolia: "It's so nice here! Isn't it great to be away from men for a while?"

Mildred: "You bet! We can finally do the kinds of things WE like to do! Uh...Gladys, the ball's over here."

Petunia: "Oooo, look! A bus transfer!

Violet: "Yeah, men always want to talk about sex! Everything to them is phallic!"

Rodneyetta: "Violet, what are we going to do with you? You're so naive!"

Queen Elizabeth: "Hi girls! Do you mind if I hang out with you for a while? It's ever so stuffy in the palace!"

Magnolia: "(Gasp!) It's the Queen! And she's hanging out with us!!! Why that's...Uh, oh......Oh, dear..........Oh, no............" BRAAAAAP!!!

Mildred: "OH Jeez, Magnolia!



Gladys: "That darn Magnolia! She should do what I do. Whenever I want to do something gross like smell my armpits, I go behind a rock and do it in the shadows."


MILDRED: "We better go, girls! We have to get back to the Theory Mansion! Mike's going to be there tonight!

VIOLET: "Mike!?  You mean the world-famous cartoonist studmuffin?! I'm there!"

WAS RUBE GOLDBERG "PRIMITIVE?"

Did Rube Goldberg work in a primitive style!!??? Absolutely not!!!!!!! He was working in a deliberately comedic style, one of the most sophisticated and effective styles in all of cartoon history!

Poor Rube is always lumped together with Bud Fisher's "Mutt and Jeff" (the long, narrow strip above). Fisher was a funny and creative artist in his prime but he was never as funny, as innovative or as warm and "human" as Goldberg.

Goldberg had more in common with Milt Gross (no example here). Both were funny as hell and both seemed to love the people they were making fun of. I don't know about you but I find Goldberg's bottom two pictures of couples (above) to be extremely tender and appealing at the same time they're caricatured. Bud Fisher couldn't touch stuff like this.

So, is Goldberg's style primitive? No!!! If the purpose of a cartoon is to get laughs then this style is shockingly efficient. The audience is already smiling before they read the caption. If any style can be called primitive it's the modern style (with very notable exceptions), which simply doesn't deliver the comedic goods.

One last look at Goldberg (above) ...(Sigh!) and I turn you back to the modern comedic style below.

Note: I know the guy who did the color drawings above. He's a talented guy and he'd probably jump at the chance to work on something genuinely funny.

SHOULD I PUT UP ADS?

WRIGGLE'S SPEARMINT GUM!


OK, this isn't one of my better efforts. I really should have redone it before posting it but, honestly, if I'd done that then I'd end up redoing everything I put up and I'd loose interest in blogging. The only way I've been able to do this on a daily basis is to put up my first or first and a half try and just hope for the best. (Sigh!)

TWO HUNDRED WAYS TO SAY, "YOU'RE STUPID!"

Whew! (Puff! Pant!) Let me take a breather....OK, Back to it...

Man! That's a pretty complete list! The only name I can think of that's missing is "dork!"

Say, while I'm at it does anyone out there know which Harlan Ellison story contains his pages-long curse...or is it just a long insult? Fans will know what I mean. Come to think of it does anyone know where in the Bible I can find the long series of curses levied against anyone who touches the Arc of the Covenant?

WHEN THE FUNNY PAPERS WERE FUNNY (PART 2)

It's hard to believe but at one time the funny papers were actually funny. If evidence is needed here's (above) a couple of panels from George Herriman's "The Family Upstairs" (1911). Look at the woman's arms in the far left panel. They're not anatomical, they're probably not even on model; they're just funny. Look at the guy leaning against the wall in the far right panel. He's a bit stretched out but who cares? It's funny.

More Family Upstairs! I like the tall guy's hands and legs in the far left panel, and his running pose in the middle one.

Here (above) are a couple of panels from Frederick Opper's "Alphonse and Gaston" (1903). Sorry for the unfortunate racial content. I include it only because the characters and staging are so doggone funny.

Jumping ahead in time a bit, here's a panel from the book "I Shoulda Ate the Eclair" by Milt Gross. I'm told that a large part of the content in Milt's books appeared in the newspapers first so I'll regard this as newspaper art. And art is the right name for it. It's gorgeous and laugh-out-loud funny.

Here's (above) a sample from "Polly and Her pals" by Cliff Sterret. Wouldn't you like to have that furniture? Somebody should open up a Cliff Sterret store.

Last but not least, here's (above) a few panels from a 1942 "Maggie and Jiggs" Sunday Page. Funny, funny stuff from George McManus.