« December 12, 2004 - December 18, 2004 | Main | December 26, 2004 - January 1, 2005 »
-->December 25, 2004
Eric Burns-White: A note from Christmas in 2004
Obviously, this hasn't been a day I've been overly concerned about Websnark. I have been concerned with a little Scrabble (I'm somewhat good at that), and being decimated in Risk by my sister, who I dub "the Mongol" from this point forward, having seen her sweep down from Asia to decimate the rest of the world.
There were three presents of significant note to you, the Websnark audience. First off, there was America: The Book, which is hysterical and a good basic primer in high quality literate snarking. I have much to learn. The other two are Art Spiegelman's In the Shadow of No Towers and Brian Walker's gorgeous The Comics Before 1945, a rich treasure trove of Krazy Kat, Thimble Theater, Little Orphan Batshit Insane Annie, Mutt and Jeff, Boob McNutt, the Bungle Family, Gasoline Alley....
Tomorrow, my nieces return home, and we do some more Christmas with them. Monday, of course, we start shortin' some bread. Tonight, I'm sitting next to a tree, surrounded by my family.
Oh, and we had Jiggers. Jiggers comes from my grandmother originally (to our knowledge, she invented them), and is essentially pie crust, cut into cookies, with cinnamon and sugar and baked. Mom had a spare crust from making the Quiche we have every Christmas morning, so we had Jiggers through the day as well. They echo down through the ages in my mind.
I hope you're all as happy on a night like this.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 11:04 PM | Comments (4)
-->December 24, 2004
Eric Burns-White: Awwwww....
(From Todd and Penguin. Click on the thumbnail for full sized Christmas Eve traditions!)
On Christmas Eve, warmly decimating my family in Scrabble, smelling a gingerbread candle and listening to A Christmas Story, I find myself in a Yuletide mood. And that was the mood I happened to read Todd and Penguin in.
Penguin, despite being a Penguin, is the most like a little kid I think I've seen in a webcomic. He's innocent and sweet... and also selfish, in his own way. But not in a bad way. I could see any five year old saying the same thing. And Holly understands and teases him just right.
It's sweet, and it makes me hope even more that Holly remains a part of the comic strip. This was just nice.
Merry Christmas, David Wright. And Merry Christmas to everyone.
Now go to bed. Santa's coming, and he's got IR scope equipment.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 10:43 PM | Comments (2)
-->Eric Burns-White: Two fast notes from Christmas Eve in the rainy rainy land of Maine
Two fast notes, from my family to you and yours, this rainy Christmas Eve.
First off, we've been listening to music and singing carols all evening. However, without a doubt our favorite music of the evening, bar none, has been Crazy Utahraptor,, by joey comeau and gilyan merry, made as fan art for one of my long time favorite comics, Daily Dinosaur Comics. My sister's been dancing to the phat rhythm, and calling people "Crazy Utahraptors" all day now. Which is joy.
Secondly, we've had our traditional Christmas Eve nosh -- meats and cheeses and fruits and crackers and the like -- and are now about to sit down to hot cocoa and lemon, orange and ginger wafers. Or, as the British would call them... biscuits.
That's right. We're having tasty, tasty biscuits.
Merry Christmas, everyone.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 8:06 PM | Comments (2)
-->December 23, 2004
Eric Burns-White: Christmas in Maine: 51É and pouring rain.
Hi all from Maine, where I -- still sick, but on vacation at least -- have settled in with my family. They all say hello, and wonder why exactly you guys read this thing.
We were discussing Websnark, and I mentioned the Sestina that I did for Narbonic. This made my father, the Professor, quite happy. My mother blinked, and said "oh, you wrote a Sestina? So did I!"
I blinked in answer -- we're a blinking kind of family, and said "really? Was it about Gerbils?"
"No," she said. "But Isadora Duncan was in it." And she and Dad disappeared into the basement. They returned after a few moments with a tan magazine, The Maze, from 1974. And she showed me her Sestina.
My own Sestina I thought was higher level because I didn't just do the end-line things -- I also made it Iambic Pentameter. My mother didn't just do a Sestina, and do it in Iambic Pentameter... she made it rhyme.
With her permission... here is my mother's Sestina:
SESTINAto decadence
Here! Stop a bit and watch our play;
And wait now for the perfect chance
To join the game. this is the day
We've planned to start our ritual dance.
So don't hang back, Ducks; What pleasure
To move within this tidy measure.No doubt you could stand a measure
Of bubbly, or some such, to play
Your part with wild abandon: Pleasure
Often needs some help lest the chance
For spontaneity be lost. Dance
And draft, then, will create the day.Still shy? Hesitate and the day
Is lost. Now's the time to measure
Your worth, the time to prove through dance
The stuff you're made of. If you play
The innocent here, Lady Chance
Must think you need no pleasure.And now, my friend, it is my pleasure
To present the cast: Lil Here (Day-
Light is her bane) devours the chance
For youthful pranks by dark. Full measure
For our Dennis, there; he'll play
If the cup o'erflows throughout the dance.This is Dora; her ; her frenzied dance
Has cast its spell on pleasure
Seekers of every sphere. Her play-
Mate here, Dear Aubrey, spends his day
In elfin merriment. Measure
Well his effects. Leave none to chance.The rest you see did merely chance
To pass this way, saw how the dance
Progressed, and fell within the measure
As though entranced. Life's sweet pleasureÒ
Principle we claim; and no day
Of reckoning shall menace our play.So, will you play? Hey grab the chance
This judgment day; for in our dance
Macabre, pleasure eludes measure.--Dian Burns, 1974
Dora refers to Isadora Duncan, Lil to Lilith of Hebrew myth (she wrote a Sestina and included Lilith -- we're bonding on so many levels tonight. And no, my mother's not a Goth), and Aubrey is Aubrey Beardsley. She doesn't remember who "Dennis" is, though he sounds like a musician who drinks. Anyone who has a theory as to Dennis's identity (Wednesday -- I'm looking at you) feel free to chime in. It would likely be someone from the turn of the 20th century. It could possibly be John Dennis, but he doesn't fit the time period) feel free to chime in.
I just think I have the coolest mother on Earth.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 9:04 PM | Comments (7)
-->Eric Burns-White: Also, Kim's got the best facial expressions in the strip, for my money.
(From Something Positive. Click on the thumbnail for full sized working the angles!)
I look forward each year to the week long "Old Familiar Faces" series in Something Positive, where we get caught up with formerly major characters who've rotated out of the limelight. There's usually a touch of Eva (who seems to have reverted back to being a victim -- either her boyfriend, who didn't seem like a douche when first we saw him, has undergone a vinegar and water sea change, or Eva either has pushed him into distancing himself or is just overreacting to what actually is a legitimate business trip), and some other folks. I'm hoping to see some T-Bob (and maybe some Jesus Mickey) before the end of it.
But I had to remark on the return of Kim, who's always been one of my favorite characters. She mentions she has one semester left, which could potentially lead to a return to the regular cast. (A return I for one would like to see.) Kim brings a somewhat more sophisticated sense of dark humor, in my opinion -- she's as dedicated as Aubrey and Peejee to chaos and suffering, but she's far more subtle in her execution of it.)
And more to the point, the strip is hysterical. Especially because it touches on one of the things I hate most about the Pagan community (a community I tend to be sympathetic to, I would add): the treatment of Christmas as an affront needing to be counterattacked, in a way that's honesty funny and darkly cynical. I appreciate that.
I should mention, I'm not a Christian. I'm what I consider a spiritual agnostic (I think there is more to this world than the eye can see, but I don't know the shape and form of what that is) who honestly respects Faith and has no time for intolerance. That's good for my good Liberal cred, but I tend to get in trouble with my peeps when I defend Christians in the same breath I defend Jews, Muslims, Pagans or Atheists. Especially at Christmas.
Dude, it's Christmas. In American society, that's become a thoroughly secular ritual, in a land where we need all the secular rituals we can get. If that secular ritual grew out of a Christian tradition... well, said Christian tradition grew out of pagan traditions too, and besides, who gives a damn? I have no problem singing Silent Night or remarking on Nativity Scenes or listening to the Choir of King's College perform the Festival of Nine Lessons and Carols. That sets a tone -- a beautiful moment that brings back years and years of happy times with my family. The fact that there are people out there who don't believe in those lessons or in the central thesis of Silent Night, and therefore shouldn't be "subjected" to them, is patently ridiculous to me. That's like trying to ban Johnny Cash music because there are people out there who don't believe in Boys named Sue.
The core of all of this is a sense that we have to be tolerant of other peoples' beliefs. This is something I agree with. I think we should acknowledge and support Chanukah and Kwanzaa, Ramadan and Agnostica alike. I think there is room for the Yule and the Solstice and Kris Kringle at this time of year. The fallacy of the current pravda is the only way we can be tolerant of all of these festivals and religions and beliefs is to acknowledge none of them. No Christmas or Chanukah or Ramadan in public areas or schools, because there might be students who don't believe in these things.
That's not tolerance and that's not separation of Church and State. That's radical intolerance aping the language of the tolerant. That's saying "because All do not believe, we must act as if None do," and that's not only wrong, it's stupid and unAmerican.
During the High Holy Days, I feel we should celebrate what it means to be Jewish in America. During Ramadan, I feel we should celebrate what it means to be Muslim in America. During Christmas, I feel we should celebrate what it means to be Christian in America. And during all these things, I think we should celebrate what it means to be American in America. And that includes the fat man in the red suit who gives things compulsively, as well as the virgin birth and the miracle of the oil in the temple and the seven Nguzu Saba of blackness, in and around this time of the year.
Milholland touches on this obliquely in this strip. He includes the shrill denunciation of Christmas that I've heard from several Pagans (not all, I'd add -- not by a long shot), but makes it clear that the shopkeeper is more interested in provoking fundamentalists into burning her shop to the ground for the insurance money than in the respective symbolisms involved. Milholland, as always, cheerfully goes for the throat here -- he's not attacking Pagans, he's attacking attitudes on both sides of the equation. And I love it. I really do.
Milholland gets yet another biscuit. A tasty, tasty Christmas biscuit, sprinkled with that green sugar that makes you wonder if it's safe to eat.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 10:34 AM | Comments (7)
-->Eric Burns-White: Totally meaningless statistics.
Since the start, I've written 365,910 words in this thing, not counting this post.
If we still went by the "typewritten page" standard (man, I totally want a USB printer that's actually a Smith Corona manual typewriter that types itself) of 250 words a page, that 1,463 pages, plus a little bit.
There are essayists in American History that are revered and extolled, to the point that Freshmen in College are forced to read them years after the essays are relevant, that didn't write so much as 500 pages in their entire career.
I am not getting paid for this.
Just, you know, for the record.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 1:00 AM | Comments (9)
-->December 22, 2004
Eric Burns-White: I wonder if someone's marketed plastic Charlie Brown pathetic trees that droop and raise automatically.
(From Blahsville. Click on the thumbnail for full sized Christmas Spirit.)
Hi all.
Still sick. In fact, looking at the screen seems to give me a massive headache. So each one of the letters I type for this post is at a price paid out in pain.
Which might mean that I'm pretty stupid. I mean, why am I even typing in the first place, given that?
Still, Blahsville is back from hand-injury hiatus, and that should be noted to one and all. And it's Christmas, or put near. And if that doesn't deserve a headache or two, I don't know what does.
The "cat-poisoning-me" theory seems to be holding up pretty well. I woke up at one point and saw her sitting on the coffee table next to the couch I was sprawled on, staring at me with obvious contentment. When I reached to pet her, she play bit my hand and sauntered away. Also, I found receipts for various poisons, and the signature was in her handwriting. Explain that, Mister Holmes -- if you can.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 11:03 PM | Comments (3)
-->Eric Burns-White: For those wondering
For those wondering (I've gotten several nice emails), I've been asleep all day. I'm going back there now.
Night.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 6:49 PM | Comments (0)
-->Eric Burns-White: Gastrointestinal distress is all the rage in Milan, darling.
Hi all. My local time is 4:40 am, I have significant pain in my intestines, and I have a body temperature of 100.2. Obviously, I'm not feeling at my most chipper.
I've decided that the Shortbread lists will have to start coming out next Monday, and proceed until the end of the week. That will give me a chance to get over this piffling inconvenience and do some serious writing without stress. Oh, and there's some family obligation over the weekend if I remember correctly.
I'm going to go lie down and accuse my cat of poisoning me.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 4:39 AM | Comments (5)
-->December 21, 2004
Eric Burns-White: A quick picture to whet your appetites for shortbread
As I put together the Shortbread Recipients lists (there are four lists -- Bringing the Funny, Bringing the Story, Bringing the Toolset and Bringing the Other Stuff), I thought you might like to see the artwork Ursula Vernon (of Digger fame) provided for the project. Snarky is without a doubt the best thing to come out of this website, in my humble opinion, and there's always something adorable about chef's hats. Needless to say, I'm thrilled with the picture. (Click on the thumbnail if you want to see it full sized.)
As I said, there are four lists. The first three -- Funny, Story and Toolset -- are then divided into categories. To be a category, there has to be at least six webcomics that come to mind that fit the category. Those six get listed, and then I give the category Shortbread out. At the end of the list, an overall webcomic for the list is picked as well, to give everyone a reason to read to the bottom.
No big deal, right?
Hah. I'm working on Bringing the Funny right now, and there are fourteen categories in it. With six nominees per category, that's eighty-four blurbs to write. Plus fourteen blurbs on the categories themselves, and fourteen blurbs about the winners. And the Overall, of course.
That's for one list.
I'm an idiot. See me roar. I'll try to get it done for today, though.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 2:47 PM | Comments (2)
-->Eric Burns-White: A double-snark, for you!
(From Timmy Kat! Click on the thumbnail for ordering information and to consign your soul to the inky blackness!)
One of my overall problems in life is ambition. In another window, I'm working on the first of four Shortbread lists. I'm totally insane. And needless to say, it's got my writing time a little bit consumed. At least it's being consumed for all of you, right?
But I need a break, and fortunately I have the perfect thing to Snark! You see, my copy of Timmy Kat came in today.
Timmy Kat is the first comic book from Mel Hynes and James L. Grant, who are best known as the writer and artist of Two Lumps. (Two Lumps is the Keenspace comic that currently heads my "why the fuck isn't this on Keenspot proper? Don't Crosby, Crosby, Bleuel and Stone like money?" list.) Well, there's some of that good old fashioned Two Lumps humor in this... and a nice healthy dose of humor from Grant's other comic, FLEM Comics.
If that doesn't scare you and thrill you all at once, go click on the FLEM link and read the archives straight through. I dare you.
This is a double-snark, however. Not only is this a fast set of impressions on Timmy Kat itself, it's also my inauguration into ComiXpress's wares. ComiXpress, for those who don't know, is the latest project from Logan DeAngelis, webcartoonist of the brilliant (and underappreciated, in my view) KU-2 and impresario of PV Comics. DeAngelis is trying to bring quality Print on Demand comic books to the Indy Comics community, coupling a certain degree of editorial oversight with the POD model.
So, on the one hand, there was no way in Hell I wasn't going to buy this comic. I'm too much of a Two Lumps and FLEM fan not to. On the other hand, this would be a chance to see the actual execution of the ComiXpress experience and see what kind of quality they could produce. In the Critical Community, this is what we call win/win.
Ordering was moderately painless but slightly frustrating. The site was well laid out, though it kind of insisted on me opening an account (which isn't my favorite thing to do when I just want to buy something). It was easy to use, though, and it featured a Paypal option for paying.
I like paying with Paypal. I always have. It's by far my favorite means of giving people money on the Internet. If Amazon.com took Paypal, I'd never go to Barnes and Noble again. So that got props from me. I went through, punched in my password, hit submit, Paypal told me the money was sent, and redirected me to ComiXpress's website to give me a receipt....
And got a page of PHP errors.
Well, shit.
So, being in a technical field, I did what I do in these situations -- I did a copy/paste of all of them and e-mailed them to their technical support. And I got back a response in like three minutes thanking me and letting me know that yes, the Paypal order went through and I'd get my stuff. Logging back in confirmed this. So, while it was scary, and could potentially lead someone to double-order, it wasn't a dealbreaker and the ComiXpress staff were fast to reassure me. And that's a good thing.
They shipped that same day, by Priority Mail, in a nice flat, solid mailer. And it got to me.
Let me finish up the ComiXpress discussion by talking about quality of printing. This is black and white, including the cover (I believe that covers at least can be printed in color over at ComiXpress, but that's not what Hynes and Grant elected to do). It's about the right size for what we think of when we think of comic books, and it's nicely put together. More to the point, my brain thinks "comic book" when I hold it, not "saddle stapled bunch of paper," which is a good sign. It prints to glossy paper for the cover, and then what feels like a seventy pound laser safe paper for the interior. From the reproductive qualities, I assume it's produced on the current generation of Docutech printer/copiers, or a competing brand that does the same thing as the Docutech. There is a little bit of streak in the greys, owing to xerographic instead of offset printing, but that's expected and hardly a dealbreaker.
Yes, I used to work at Kinko's. I own my McPast, damn it.
The interiors are bright and clear, thanks to the paper choice (quality paper really stands out, especially in the greys). The pictures look good, and the text of the introduction and foreward (by R. K. Millholland and Nick Mamatas respectively) is crisp and clean. The text of the story proper has a little bit of jaggedness to it, but that's more an issue with the font (which really wasn't meant for the size it was printed at) than the reproduction.
Suffice it to say, I don't feel badly for spending five bucks on this comic. I sort of expect to drop five bucks on a 36 page comic with minimal advertising (which is confined to the back of the comic and is all in-house for ComiXpress) these days, and I'm not disappointed with the quality.
So, enough of that. You want to know how Timmy Kat is.
The art is beautiful. Two words: Sand Castle. I don't know how Grant has enough life to draw that. The story hits the tone it was going for -- this is written as a children's book (well, in style. Though my nieces might like it. But then, I have exceptional nieces with dark senses of humor), and it comes across exactly right for that. The pacing was excellent, and the story resolved in exactly the way I hoped.
Oh, and Hynes and Grant are total bastards who will come to a horrible end, and I need to spork out my own eyes and wander the streets in a purgatory of my own creation, babbling incoherently but insightfully until the darkness of sweet oblivion claims me at last.
But that's really what I was looking for in their first comic. Needless to say, I am content.
Now, back to these damn Shortbread recipients. Me and my fucking bright ideas.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 2:03 PM | Comments (4)
-->December 20, 2004
Eric Burns-White: I suppose I could always leave a print of this strip for my parents to find, with "Crate O' Porn" circled. Of course, then they'd make me leave the house until the New Year....
(From Yirmumah. Click on the thumbnail for full sized Holiday Suggestions!)
One of the things I've always liked about Yirmumah is it's willingness to cheerfully go for your fucking throat. Today's... well, yesterday's... okay, by the time most of you read this, Sunday's Yirmumah exemplifies this. It's so happy, even while its subject matter is so vicious. Go ahead! Pick up a few old people and some medical waste for Christmas! Tis the Season, bitch!
Also... I'm not sure why, but seeing Drew in a hat made me a very happy Panda. I've been grooving on the expanded format strips (and the December 12 strip was poignant, which is not a word I often use with Yirmumah), but seeing a floppy hat on Drew just felt right to me. Mad Stylin', yo.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 11:52 PM | Comments (1)
-->Eric Burns-White: There's probably a psychology paper in the association of credit and food in this blog.
From the very start, I've tried to make a distinction between critiques, which is what I try to do with Websnark, and reviews. It hasn't been easy. Part of the problem is terminology, of course. The technical term for literary and artistic analysis is criticism, which back in the 19th century didn't presume to be positive or negative. Criticism simply was. However, in the 20th century, the word criticism came to mean adverse judgment. It got to the point where they came up with a whole new phrase for criticism that wasn't meant harshly -- "constructive criticism" -- and even there the idea was "here's the stuff you're doing wrong and should change."
But over in the world of literary criticism, "criticism" doesn't mean "here's what they did wrong." It means "here's what they did, decoded and analyzed, and put into perspective." Different critical theories lead to different senses of perspective, of course. A historicist might want to put an author's short story into the perspective of the author's life, or into societal trends of the time, or into the cosm of literary development as it was shown both at that time and into the present. A new critic might want to explore the subtextual perspective, finding connections in the specific story's text and tying them back into each other. A Marxist critic might want to show how the short story highlights societal evolution and class warfare. And so on, and so forth.
A reviewer, on the other hand, wants to judge worth. He might bring all of the above tools and perspectives into play, of course. But in the end, he's rendering a judgment on the piece. "This is good," he says. "This is not good. This sucks berries."
Our word for the analyst mentioned two paragraphs ago? "Critic." Our word for the reviewer mentioned one paragraph ago? "Critic."
C'est la vie. I am a critic. I work at being an analyst, discussing technique and meaning where I can. Often, I am a reviewer, saying "I think this is so fucking cool!" (Or, at the other extreme, "you had me, and you lost me.") Somewhere in between the two aspects of the word "Criticism," you'll find Websnark.com.
Well, reviewers tend to come out with their ten best list, their award shows and the like. And many of them also come out with star ratings or things like that. Well, I don't do "stars" or anything like it. I just give out biscuits to individual strips that really appeal to me, and otherwise I do short essays expressing my thesis and move on.
But, it's the end of a calendar year... and at the end of a calendar year the urge to have the big gala prize events is overpowering. And I am just a man, like any other. I have needs, you know. I'm only human.
So. over the next several days, we're going to have our Websnark Year End Wrapup, where I give some general props to the webcomics that have made me just plain happy to be a webcomics fan. We're going to ape an awards show, in that I'm going to have several nominees in each category, and then announce who gets the nod, but it's all purely my opinion, no one else's, and so you're going to disagree with some of them. Hell, a month after this, I'm going to reread it and think what was I thinking?
Be that as it may. It's my website, and I want to play at being a reviewer for a few days. And it's going to be a Websnark-happy series of events. We're going to go through the old jargon pretty hard. There will be Bringing of Things, there will be Cerebus Syndromes. There will be Funny and Story and Toolsets galore. If you're not a fan of the Lexicon -- and I know there's people out there who aren't -- this is pretty well going to suck for you. Consider that the disclaimer.
The question is... what are we going to call this?
Well, individual daily strips sometimes earn a biscuit -- a tasty, tasty biscuit -- from me.
Strips at the end of the year? They get Shortbread. It's Christmas, after all.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 12:15 PM | Comments (9)
-->Eric Burns-White: A fast Anacrusis correction
A reader (not Brendan, but someone else) wrote in to let me know that my examination of Anacrusis's archives wasn't quite accurate. I indicated that Anacrusis had been running almost as long as Hitherby Dragons. In fact, Hitherby Dragons unofficially began on 25 September 2003, and officially began on 26 November 2003. Anacrusis, on the other hand, actually started on 18 July 2003, two months before the earliest dated note in Hitherby's archives, and was off and running full out from day one.
The 18 July 2003 entry is called Stephanie, and while it's not as deft as later entries would become, it's still a good read and shows the strength of the 101 word limit right from the start. I wonder if Brendan's found the weblog equivalent of the haiku.
Mm. Hopefully not. 90% of all haikus suck.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 11:22 AM | Comments (9)
-->Eric Burns-White: Server move is complete! And Thunderbirds are GO!
People have noticed that the commenting, search, and... well, pretty much all automated features of the site have been down for a little while. As I told you not too long ago, they were moving me to a whole new server, chock full of new server goodness and that new server smell that makes you feel so proud to be an American.
I've done the necessary bits of maintenance to acclimate Movable Type to its new home. At this stage, everything should work. Please let me know if you come across something that's still unhappy.
And thanks, all!
Edit: Okay -- Typekey, which is my eternal nemesis, has decided to bitch about the server move. So commenting's still dead. I'll get it running as quickly as possible.
Comments are working. Game on!
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 10:46 AM | Comments (2)
-->Eric Burns-White: Now, if I could just keep these snarks down to 101 words, we'd really have something.
Since having it brought to my attention, I've been thinking quite a bit about Anacrusis. You should know by now that I'm interested in how people use the web (particularly content management software) to work creatively. Sure, most of the time it seems it's webcomics I talk about when I bring it up, but there's a lot to be said for textual experimentation. In particular, there's something fascinating about the short scenework that's being done. I've mentioned Hitherby Dragons before, and I've mentioned Pulp Decameron (which itself is muddling through some unfortunate technical problems, but seems to be producing on schedule regardless).
Well, running almost as long as Hitherby (it's just passed its one year anniversary) is Anacrusis, and there are ways it stands out even in Rebecca Borgstrom's illustrious company. Brendan (I don't have a last name... or first name, if Brendan turns out to be a last name. I mean, how would I know?) writes five entries a week, one each Monday through Friday, and if he's missed any days I can't find them on casual examination.
What makes these entries stand out is their format. He describes them as webcomics without art, and I think there's something to that -- instead of being bound to a four panel a day strip, he holds himself to the absolute constraint of one hundred and one words a day, period. No more, no less. 101. Just like the room where everyone's fear can be found in 1984, though I don't think that's what Brendan has in mind.
The results are profound, in the best sense of that word. There's almost a metrical quality to the work -- as though Brendan were working in a new kind of poetry instead of prose. Many (most?) of the entries have a strong sense of imagery as well, which also reinforces the almost poetic sensibility going on.
And really, that makes sense, if this is a textual webcomic. Poetry and visual art are very closely related, thematically. Both operate in the world of image instead of narration. And Anacrusis steeps itself in that tradition. Here's Friday's entry, "Dresden", as an example. (Please note I reprint this under the terms of Brendan's Creative Commons License, and the reprint is bound by his license, not my own CCL.)
Dresden feels things turn inside out. His vision's broken and he can't walk. He braces himself against the wall and tries to vomit, managing only a mouthful of sour bile. He spits on the ugly carpet; it's the same ochre yellow as the drink AJ handed him at the bar, calling it a Pissguzzler. He smiled. He had green eyes. Dresden wanted to show off, so he slammed it, then another, and not long after he was feeling much too drunk, too heavy, and as he felt the air cool on his sudden legs he wondered what "AJ" actually stood for.
See how the economy of words acts like a crucible, burning away the dross and excess words and leaving an almost pure sense of image? Dresden's nausea is evoked, not implied. The sentences are short -- staccato, almost Hemingwayesque, conveying a sense of mood and scene and making every adjective carry its own weight.
It occurs to me that in my snark on Pulp Decameron's self-described microfiction, I compared that work to poetry as well. Perhaps the paring down to the very basics involves blurring the dividing line between poetry and prose. Looking at Hitherby Dragons, which also works in short fiction and vignette, one sees similar elements -- short, simple sentences, with heavy imagery -- applied with completely different intent. As my father, the English Professor, was fond of saying... there's probably a paper in there somewhere.
I don't mean to pigeonhole Anacrusis. It works within its firm limit very well, and there is a real sense of experimentation. At the same time, it's not experimenting for the sake of experimenting. Brendan is really trying to tell stories, working within his limits but not letting his sense of ambition be limited.
In the end, like he said... it's a webcomic made up of words. I can really see that.
I actually had thought, about a year ago, to reprint my old Superguy stories one post or part at a time, three times a week, using KeenPremium's software -- as though it were a webcomic without a graphic. After all, in the preWeb days, Superguy is what we had for webcomics. But I think Anacrusis gets closer to the idea than our stuff ever would.
In any case, I'm enjoying reading it... and I'm looking forward to reading more.
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 8:59 AM | Comments (1)
-->December 19, 2004
Eric Burns-White: This is getting astoundingly recursive.
(From Narbonic. Click on the thumbnail, if you're a subscriber, for full COLOR and SIZED Burns Sestina goodness! Or click on the link and see whatever Narbonic is today's, if you're not a subscriber!)
Ordinarily, when Websnark gets referred to in a strip I read and happen to mention over here, I put up a "submitted without comment" note at the beginning, and then proceed to comment in like six parenthetical postscripts. It's like humor, only without the laughter part.
But that's not what's happening with this Narbonic. You see, we're officially entering into a feedback loop here, and that should be appropriately noted.
It all started when I
Shaenon Garrity, one of the bidders, said that had she won, she would require me to write a snark in the form of a sestina. Which is a poem where....
...no, I refuse to define a sestina again. Just deal with it.
Anyway, while I wasn't obligated to do the sestina, the idea of it appealed to me. And there's nothing that says I can't do stuff that sounds cool just because Garrity didn't win. So I ramped up the difficulty a bit (because while said sestina would be by definition clever instead of great poetry, when you're showing off you might as well go all the way), and I wrote that puppy.
Shaenon asked for the right to reprint it in Narbonic, which she did today, in the post I referred to. And she also did actual hand colored art for it, which makes me bounce happily. Said art is pretty, said typography is decent, and as for the rest....
...well, the rest is something I wrote, so it's not really up to me to say if it's good or if it sucks. But I enjoyed seeing it, and it seemed only appropriate to get another snark out of this whole thing. Next, we just need a Snarkoleptics post about this post, and then a webcomic's rant post about that post, and so on, and so on....
Posted by Eric Burns-White at 9:47 PM | Comments (2)
