Drinking at the Movies
I glow Hobart and came across an interview with Julia Wertz. Interesting. I then went to her comic blog (once named Fart Party, but she’s tired of that phrase). I then $$ her book. I also glow drinking at the movies. Once, during an absolutely packed house of the showing of Fahrenheit 911 (this was Massachusetts, go figure), I snuck a Fosters oil can into my pants and then when I opened it (always an awkward moment) the beer loudly exploded all over my jeans. That was embarrassing. Julia Wertz is a graphic memoirist. Often she is stumbling, spilling things, misunderstanding the situation, young and dumb (I mean the type of dumb that comes with this developmental age; the character is always self aware and obviously intelligent) and wander/wondering about Brooklyn—often, well, embarrassed. (Example: At one point, she has a giant, painful, of-unknown-origin rash on her ass.) If you are about to go all Oh God another story about a twenty-something in Brooklyn, blah, blah, bar scene, go right ahead. In the introduction, Julia Wertz says, “As an autobiographical writer, I had no choice but to portray the natural progression of my life, and I apologize to anyone who’s sick of these stories as I am.”
It’s an insightful, funny thing to say, and most likely speaks to one of the more endearing aspects of this character, her voice.
The Julia Wertz in this particular mode (In creative nonfiction, I believe the “I” is only a version of the self, appearing here to deliver this specific content) is a bit exhausted by the daily doings of her life: shitty jobs, shitty apartments (in one, she rents out her bedroom and actually sleep in the closet), etc. She emphasizes she isn’t ready or really longing to “grow up,” yet clearly she is sort of ready to grow up. The tension of this contradiction is one thing that removes Drinking at the Movies from some of the clichéd nature of a typical coming-of-age in New York narrative. What else removes it? The humor. Julia Wertz is funny, not only in apt observation (one key to true humor is to get the thing right, before you twist to effect), but in narrative timing, the way a stand-up comedian understands structure (set-up, callbacks, punchlines). She has an ongoing routine with the street people in her urban life. They ask her out. They scream crazy things at her. They throw cartons of milk at her chest. “Bums 1,3, and 7” even get a WHERE ARE THEY NOW? bit at the conclusion of the book. Though some of these devices we’ve seen before (square, out of touch mom; crazy landlords; I’m locked out of apartment again, etc.), many of them are fresh, lively, human, and, well, very funny. (Example, Julia Wertz is so small in stature that people, bartenders especially, repeatedly believe she is a young kid.) The main device is self-deprecation. And this usually works. The character’s life is consistently fucked up, so you have to root for her. Plus she drinks a ton of whiskey, and isn’t that sympathetic? It actually is. This character wakes from benders and blackouts in laundry mats, on picnic benches. Several times she has whiskey for breakfast. Another aspect of this device I found intriguing was how the narrator keeps telling us how incredibly plain she looks, and then the last page has an actual author image (not illustrated, a photo) and Julia Wertz is clearly cute. I thought this worked. These things are bent, subjective, certainly in relation to our own looks, and the idea of the self as unattractive, as repulsive, or just as ordinary in a world of glamorous Others trying so hard to be seen as beautiful, is, again, an effective and honest comic device. Don’t think so? Just go to any standup club and listen.
I feel odd writing about a graphic memoir. I think I have read four graphic books in my life, Maus, The Alcoholic, one I forget (must have been good, eh?), and Drinking at the Movies. About twice a year, a student tries to get me to read The Watchmen, and one time I tried to but put it down after six pages. Sorry. The four comics I have read, I remember knocking out in one sitting. This made me feel bewildered and a little angry. One friend says, “Well, they don’t have a lot of words.” Another says, “You have to appreciate the drawing.” This is most likely true. But I don’t know how. I don’t have the sensibility so to speak. Sure this type of drawing looks noir, this vintage, or black and white versus color is an interesting conversation, etc., but I feel I need a better knowledge base. Or maybe I do appreciate some aspects? I did like getting online and seeing how Julia Wertz’s drawing evolved. (Example here). I suppose I am saying others probably get more from the drawings than I do. I’m sure this is true of other things in my life, like champagne, jewelry in the shape of eggs, or music (With some exceptions, I’m not a huge fan). But I don’t feel that odd about writing about this particular book. I’m doing it to see what I think (I plan to read more graphic books, to attempt a small form of self education), and obviously I am spending time here because I enjoyed. I suggest you order the comic (or one of her others?) directly from Julia Wertz, because it will come signed/doodled with separate hand drawn comics panels and your own mini comic. My mini-comic was about the day Julia Wertz killed Jesus. That hurts! And is funny. My comic panel was a large closeup drawing of Julia Wertz with a pencil jammed deeply into her left eye. That hurts! And is funny…painfully funny human condition. I think it’s what I am trying to say.
Tags: Graphic Novels, Julia Wertz, Sometimes I wrote from Confusion, Whiskey
I also read graphic novels/comics/manga/whatever pretty fast, and am actually confused about how other people read them slow. I don’t know if I’m doing it wrong, like I’m supposed to just look at the drawings longer or… I don’t know. I don’t feel that bad about it, but have friends that take at least 3 times as long to read anything of this nature.
I never got into any of the comics you mentioned because the art style either takes itself too seriously (Maus, The Alcoholic), or it looked too generic (Drinking at the Movies). Comics work best in the humor vein, and if you’re gonna tell a funny story, why not make the drawings funny, too?
Like, Pete Bagge wrote a similar coming-of-age thing (Buddy Does Seattle –> Buddy Does Jersey –> Hate Annual), but his illustrations are so fucking goofy and hilarious that the text takes a backseat to the visuals, and, Idunno, I feel that’s the purpose of a comic.
Anyway, if you want more visually entertaining stuff that isn’t trying to be Art because comics aren’t supposed to be Art, check out Monsters by Gabby Schulz (www.gabbysplayhouse.com), anything by Johnny Ryan, Paul Hornschemeier’s Forlorn Funnies (his newer stuff is sad, but just as good), Ivan Brunetti’s Blab!… not to mention quarterly comps like Mome are always a great place to discover stuff.
The only drawback with comics is they are really fucking expensive and the best ones aren’t in libraries.
Also Michael Deforge! Jesus Christ, Michael Deforge.
why are comics not “supposed to be Art”?
that’s fucking dumb mang
I guess they can be Art, but not the ones I’m interested in.
Comics, at least the ones I got into, never took themselves seriously. They were about people’s entire insides coming out of a popped zit, ridiculous unrealistic body proportions, dudes sucking off swastikas with dicks. I don’t want to see comics try and do something like fucking “sublimate the narrative” or some other jargon I don’t give a shit about. I just want to see a cool drawing backed by a vivid and fucked-up imagination, and maybe the occasional punchline.
Art, for me, takes away from the fun and easy-going attitude of comics. It makes all the people who get together at zine festivals and all the people who make their own zines and bring them to local stores to sell self-conscious. Fuck that — we have enough of that negativity in literature and music. I don’t want Art’s dick in my comix cereal.
And in case you were going to call me out on over-generalizing: of course I am! Mark Newgarden, Al Columbia, and some others I can’t recall off-hand are making comics that I guess could be called Art. But for every Al Columbia and Mark Newgarden there are a hundred schmucks who don’t know what they’re doing trying to emulate them, and I don’t think that should be encouraged.
– but Wise and Mighty One, Wertz isn’t “trying to be Art [just] because comics aren’t supposed to be Art”, is she??
Check the cover (I’m guessing) image in the blogicle: I think the ‘chick’ on the right (with the black, slightly grown-out page-boy and, eh, skeptical forehead) is a self-portrait (??). Anyway, look at the beer (?) she’s drinking – especially at the nipple on its top. Maybe I just amn’t seeing the image properly, but I laughed. (I’m ribald and laugh much.)
Ha, yeah. I’m not anti-Wertz or anything. I’d pick up her book if someone had it lying around or strongly recommended it to me. But I’d rather read a 300 page book of Sergio Aragones doodles.
I don’t think Wertz is trying to be Art. I think Maus and The Alcoholic are. I’m not interested in Wertz because her drawings don’t wow me. Not the end of the world.
Ha, yeah. I’m not anti-Wertz or anything. I’d pick up her book if someone had it lying around or strongly recommended it to me. But I’d rather read a 300 page book of Sergio Aragones doodles.
I don’t think Wertz is trying to be Art. I think Maus and The Alcoholic are. I’m not interested in Wertz because her drawings don’t wow me. Not the end of the world.
Ha, yeah. I’m not anti-Wertz or anything. I’d pick up her book if someone had it lying around or strongly recommended it to me. But I’d rather read a 300 page book of Sergio Aragones doodles.
I don’t think Wertz is trying to be Art. I think Maus and The Alcoholic are. I’m not interested in Wertz because her drawings don’t wow me. Not the end of the world.
Ha, yeah. I’m not anti-Wertz or anything. I’d pick up her book if someone had it lying around or strongly recommended it to me. But I’d rather read a 300 page book of Sergio Aragones doodles.
I don’t think Wertz is trying to be Art. I think Maus and The Alcoholic are. I’m not interested in Wertz because her drawings don’t wow me. Not the end of the world.
Sorry about the double-comments. Internet at work is fcked
well while we’re at it we may as well tell people to stop writing anything other than mass-market, plot-driven tripe, because when they strain for art, well, most people fail. also, i’m tired of movies that find me thinking at all. similarly i don’t think any music should have more than three chords. and conceptual art? fuck that shit, everybody should stay well within the confines of what Thomas Kinkade has shown us is a banal and lucrative market. Clearly, trying to achieve something sublime and beautiful is not a worth cause at all, because so many people ‘don’t know what they’re doing’!
if you don’t like art comix then that’s your prerogative. i, on the other hand, would rather reach my hand down my throat and pull out my intestines yard by yard than suffer through another ‘hilarious’ and ‘wacky’ and ‘gross’ autobiographical indie comic by Robert Crumb or somebody who worships the ground that he walks on.
I just posted a response to this but it didn’t come up? Maybe it’s in the spam thing?
Anyway, I’ll try and conjure up the energy this afternoon to respond again if it failed. I’ve been so receptive at present because I’m hungover and don’t want to work.
But just out of curiosity: have you ever read Johnny Ryan?
Yeah, Johnny Ryan is fantastic. I don’t think I’ve ever read anything by him that’s specifically autobiographical (at least in an “honest” or “soul-baring” kind of way). I enjoy the shit out of low-brow gross out weird sex shit (I have a complete run of Robin Bougie’s Cinema Sewer and Sleazy Slice comix too, most of Hans Rickheit’s work [which is more in the vein of Al Columbia I guess], a large collection of porno comix, and a lot of juvenile zines via Picturebox, guro/garo manga), but to say that nobody should strive to make art comix is annoying as hell. My favorite graphic work is definitely “Art comix,” both along the lines of Martin Vaughn-James / Schuiten & Peeters as well as stuff like CF & Carlos Gonzales & Yuichi Yokoyama but I don’t like there to be a binary that prevents me from enjoying something.
Yeah, Johnny Ryan is fantastic. I don’t think I’ve ever read anything by him that’s specifically autobiographical (at least in an “honest” or “soul-baring” kind of way). I enjoy the shit out of low-brow gross out weird sex shit (I have a complete run of Robin Bougie’s Cinema Sewer and Sleazy Slice comix too, most of Hans Rickheit’s work [which is more in the vein of Al Columbia I guess], a large collection of porno comix, and a lot of juvenile zines via Picturebox, guro/garo manga), but to say that nobody should strive to make art comix is annoying as hell. My favorite graphic work is definitely “Art comix,” both along the lines of Martin Vaughn-James / Schuiten & Peeters as well as stuff like CF & Carlos Gonzales & Yuichi Yokoyama but I don’t like there to be a binary that prevents me from enjoying something.
Where you spot a sly nipple, I see a longneck in a foam koozie. Could be a difference in upbringing.
Well the thing about tripe comics versus tripe writing is that a comic with a tripe story line and tripe dialogue can still be wonderful so long as the artwork is good. Setting uniform standards onto various mediums of art is a bad idea. I also might have a bias in saying I like tripe comics more than tripe writing because I am so much more invested in writing than comics, so shitty writing hurts me so much more than a shitty comic.
As for trying to achieve something sublime and beautiful, to quote you: “NOTHING IS OBJECTIVE BRO”. Silly thoughtless comics make me smile and laugh to myself, both of which are rare when I am by myself, and that’s pretty beautiful and sublime to me.
Looking at your comment below, though, I get the feeling our definitions of Art are comingled at some points and separated at others, so we’re not on the same page, but fuck it. I never liked Robert Crumb – his art is boring and his comics are too text-heavy, though I’m sure there must be something out there of his I’d like, considering how much shit he churned out.
Of course the two should be mingling. Everything should be mingled at least once. My problem with the Art perspective is it has a tendency to make artists think they should strive for a preordained list of goals, instead of producing material for themselves. And when you try and smack a finish line on any medium of art — that is, when you try and delineate it — I think you are doing more damage than good.
i’m pretty sure you are articulating “Art” in some weird way that I completely don’t understand. What are some comics that “strive to be art” and fail? are you equating Art with like… idk I guess the predetermined idea of Heavy Literary Fiction or something?
See that’s the thing. I like that low brow gross out stuff (Tijuana Bibles!), but I would also call a lot of it tripe, even though I love it. Idunno. I have an appreciation for dumb shit. I am a big fan of Dora the Explorer.
I dunno any of those art comix names, though it’s possible I’ve seen some of those guys browsing through a Craig Yoe book without buying it?
It’s fine that me saying people shouldn’t do something pisses you off. I was over-generalizing. I am afraid of the intrusion of Art into comics so I made an over-the-top comment pertaining to it.
Heavy Literary Fiction, I think that’s it, and I think that’s the thing with comics, there are two ways to perceive it as Art — there’s the text and there’s the illustrative work.
Comics that strive to be Art and fail: Black Hole, anything by Adrian Tomine, that kind of stuff.
Heavy Literary Fiction, I think that’s it, and I think that’s the thing with comics, there are two ways to perceive it as Art — there’s the text and there’s the illustrative work.
Comics that strive to be Art and fail: Black Hole, anything by Adrian Tomine, that kind of stuff.
ooo, has anyone read BODYWORLD by Dash Shaw?
http://www.dashshaw.com/bodyworld_prelude.html
One of the more original and very fun ones I’ve seen recently. It’s sort of ugly on the page but full of deeply pleasing visual ideas. Very “internet aesthetic.” It’s about a drug that makes you able to feel what it’s like to be inside someone else’s self / body / memories / emotions. And plus, it’s funny!
The koozie – no question. Longneck – maybe. But the dull yellow thing on top tapers nozzle-style. ? – some mutation of bubble-topped Blarsucks cups? a wooden spoon in a choco icy pile? a Jetsons pop-tab? (no way . . .)
Wouldn’t hold anything in my background responsible for me drinking from nipples.
What does “internet aesthetic” mean?
Perhaps I was trying to explain away my fondness for drinking from koozies.
Well check it out . . . the narrative moves through time and genre in an internet-y way and maybe some of this is because Bodyworld was originally published as a web comic, though I read it in book-form. The sort of jokes and their range are also very internet aesthetic – – the way Shaw uses memes, and style references, even the colors.
(And I think this internet aesthetic is one of the most exciting things Bodyworld’s got going for it – – it’s done very successfully in a smart and funny way, even if the content of the visual ideas & moves are more deeply pleasing as ideas than they are beautiful. It’s weirdly sort of ugly, actually. But pleasing nevertheless.) Plus the core of the multiverse premise is one that has been around for a long time, but is one which I think people can grasp a lot more clearly now that we can visualize it in a mundane way because it is now obvious that we live in it.
But you’ve seen the internet, no? You know what it’s like here.
Feels good man.
will do
Nice review, Sean. I’ll have to check this out.
The only two graphic novels I’ve ever read I loved: Fun Home: A Family Tragicomic and The Essential Dykes to Watch Out For, both by Alison Bechtel.