Something interesting happened to one of my Reviewers Unknown colleagues recently that kind of has my attention. The Comic Strip Critic, whom you may remember from an Internet Spotlight article, found himself in a unique situation…getting to interview someone whose work he harshly criticized on his show, The Punchline. As a commentator who has at times gotten the opportunity to do interviews thanks to local conventions, this is a worry that I’ve had myself: how do you balance what you do as a reviewer with what you do as an interviewer. Where does the line between review/commentary and news begin and end? As people whose work I’ve reviewed find my site this is one I have to think about before I become Superboy Prime.
With John Weber’s permission here’s the Vlog in question. At the end he also does a quick review of Dear Mr. Watterson, a biography of the creator of John’s favorite strip, Calvin & Hobbes. I get namedropped because of a report I saw on Twitter and sent back to him.
Now my pursuit is more about creating fiction than reporting, but while this site is primarily a review/commentary site I have posted basic news reports in the past without comment and I do interviews at conventions. Originally that was supposed to be talking to independent and self-publishers but when you have the chance to interview Frank McLaughlin you interview Frank McLaughlin (and hopefully do a better job than my nervous self did).
That said, I do understand his concerns and embarrassment. I’ve had similar concerns when people whose stuff I reviewed in Today’s Comic or Saturday Night Showcase find my reviews. The latter was always positive in every form…if only because Saturday Night Galactica didn’t get to the bad episodes. The former…not always. One artist found a negative review of his work in an issue of Marvel Adventures Spider-Man, where I said that a teenage girl (namely Chat) looked more like an “old Jewish woman” stereotype, yet still linked to it. Thankfully, the only backlash was some guy who doesn’t think old Jewish women exist. If I remembered which issue it was I’d link to it. Luckily positive reviews have also elicited visits, and I even gained a regular reader from it. (Hey, Landry!) I know that John has had a few of his positive reviews found by the strip’s cartoonist, although that’s because he sent them a link. Dirty cheater. 😀
At the same time is the issue of impartiality, a strong requirement for being a reviewer. Going back to Landry when I brought up a few issues I had with Danger Club (by the way, next issue reviewed tomorrow) we had a decent discussion. I love Kurt Busiek’s work, but I mentioned problems I had with Kirby: Genesis. I have a “got right” and “got wrong” category in my daily comic reviews to show that most comics aren’t all good or all bad. And always , whether you like or hate something doesn’t mean it isn’t done well or poorly, just that it isn’t to your taste. This will be true when I’m doing more than Jake & Leon as a writer. But the knowledge that creators are finding my reviews and perhaps even my commentaries does stay in my head and I try to remember that when it comes to reviews now. I don’t want to be harsh whether I’m friends with them or not. I certainly don’t want to wake up one night with Simon Furman standing over me about to do something painful to me. But as a critic I must point out what I see is a problem. That’s how this works for me, but I don’t know about other bloggers and reviewers. I know the video reviewers have their own obstacles to deal with.
The death of Lisa, 10/4/2007. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Getting back to the Comic Strip Critic, I did get to see his Funky Winkerbean reviews and I’ll admit that I thought he was kind of hard on Batiuk, but only because I knew what he was TRYING to say in response to his critics. If you haven’t seen the strip or the Punchline episode, it was a strip where Batiuk responded to complaints about the change in tone of Funky Winkerbean and his other comic, Crankshaft. I never read older Crankshaft strips but I grew up with Funky and the gang (although I was more interested in Les and always felt the comic was less about Funky than an ensemble strip with the rest of the cast–even now Funky himself barely shows up when I do get to read it) and I know it used to be…not a very strong laugh strip but certainly a lighter tone than it has today. In an interview I did find (see “related articles below”) he stated that the debut of Lisa and how Les interacted with her (and possibly his bout with cancer) led to a more dramatic strip while keeping the art style. I try not to judge the comic by the old style and unlike Chris Sims of Comics Alliance I don’t have a problem with the tone.
The strip in question had one of the characters (I don’t follow the strip regularly so I’m not up on the new cast) commenting to a stand-in for his critics about how the “comic” in comic strip doesn’t have to mean funny. One of my favorites is The Phantom (a strip I would love to see the Comic Strip Critic tackle at some point), a dramatic strip that would also classify as what the Critic refers to as a “zombie strip” (or the less derogatory “legacy strip”), a strip continued after the original cartoonist or team has retired or passed away. Usually they lose what the creator brought to it and if they can’t replace it with something else it becomes a problem. Batiuk was trying to make the point that his comic was now a dramatic strip and shouldn’t be judged against something like Zits or Blondie, comics intended to be comedy. (Your verdict as to their success.) I also agree with the Critic that it wasn’t very well presented and it was during his interview with Batiuk that it was made clearer. You shouldn’t have to do “homework” to understand what you’re reading or watching and based solely on the strip in question I think the preachiness of the strip is a bit more blatant that it should be, making for an uninteresting read outside of the hard tone he takes towards his critics.
I sometimes wonder what would happen if I ever met someone I’ve rallied against, like Geoff Johns or Simon Furman. How would I handle it? I hear Rob Liefeld is a real nice guy but I’ve not only made negative comments about his work, but did an entire series on his version of Battlestar Galactica. On three different websites. I do try to point out where I thought they did something right in their work or said something I agree with in an interview. My first post was complimenting the animated version of Todd McFarlane’s Spawn, a cartoon and comic I personally hate. This is one of those things we of the reviewing and blogging community have to think about. Where does the person end and the product begin. At what point are we being too harsh versus at what point we’re letting someone get away with an inferior story? I really don’t envy John’s position in balancing his journalistic integrity when it comes to being fair to an interview subject and his being honest about his opinions as the Comic Strip Critic, reading the funny papers in the hope that someday they will be (his tagline).
What will be interesting to see is how this affects him as both a reporter (whatever his ultimate career goals are) and as a critic, trying to find the balance. I’m also curious to see what he decides about his Funky Winkerbean and “Worst of 2012” videos. He ran face-first into a wall I barely grazed but I’m hoping as a fan of his work, a colleague, and a fan of reviewing, he becomes a better critic for it. It’s not an easy call for reviewers in any format when someday you may have to face the person whose work you’ve reviewed.
Related articles
- Tom Batiuk Talks “Funky Winkerbean” (comicbookresources.com) <–no, not the interview in question)
BW Media Spotlight 