Webcomics: The New Underground?

[colin]

I went to this talk last night called "Comix: Heros of the Revolution." It consisted of a panel of Underground comic artists: American Gilbert Shelton (Freak Brothers) and Britions Hunt Emerson (Firkin the Cat) and Bryan Talbot (Tale of one bad rat) and hosted by Dez Skin who was launching his book of the same title.

As a twenty four year old, that era of comics is something I don't know that much about. For me, that whole era is quite romanticized. It was a revolution in all aspects: political, social, cultural, artistic, etc. Comics were just a part of a larger thing, starting in Haight-Ashbury and spreading around the world.

Near the end of this talk last night, someone in the audience began a debate about the internet, and what the panelists thoughts were on it. All four of them were uninformed and, seemingly uninterested about comics on the internet today. They were seemingly, quite old school - and fair enough!

An audience member suggested that "Underground" comics today were happening on the internet. The panelists muttered a little bit, and didn't seem to agree - or rather know enough about it to give an opinion. For that matter they couldn't really give an opinion on whether there was a true *underground* in comics today or not!

Another audience member mentioned Scott McClouds site - not only for his recent flash comics, but also his extensive comic blog directing internet users to other comic sites. Again the panelists knew that McCloud was interested in the internet, but they had no idea what he was doing, etc. One of them (I think it was Bryan Talbot) said "In the 70s we were truly doing experimental stuff - changing the way comics looked, etc... I don't think that's happening on the web right now."

I disagree, and I suppose most people reading these forums would as well. Look at McCloud, look at Merlin, look at John Barber... All pushing the limits of what comics are, and can do.

It was suggested last night that the web was still quite elite (need to have a computer, connection, learn how to use it, know where to go, etc). But it was quickly argued that so were underground comics in the 70s (sold in "Head" shops, etc)...

Then there is the issue of subversion, which I think is the most interesting. The Underground & the Hippies were all about subversion: politically, sexually, culturally, musically, artistically etc. It was a revolution! The internet, and webcomics as I see them are first and formost, a technological revolution and an artistic revolution. There is a political aspect to the web - democratic, freedom of speech - etc, all that stuff that Wired talked about ten years ago. But is it subversive in the way that the underground was 35 years ago? Or is it just another technological revolution like the photocopier or the macintosh?

Are webcomics today the "new" underground?

[William G]

One of them (I think it was Bryan Talbot) said "In the 70s we were truly doing experimental stuff - changing the way comics looked, etc... I don't think that's happening on the web right now."

Would you expect a better attitude from members of the generation that thinks they invented everything from music to fucking?

Underground comics all defined themselves by what they weren't, and they were so busy trying not to be mainstream they all looked and read the same. They got pretty boring, and fast.

How long has Crumb been coasting on his name now?

Unusual for me, I know, but I'm going to step up and make a sweeping statement-
There is a million times more diversity in genre and a million times the energy and drive on the web than those aging potheads ever had in their five years in California.

[Greg Stephens]

The panelists muttered a little bit, and didn't seem to agree - or rather know enough about it to give an opinion. For that matter they couldn't really give an opinion on whether there was a true *underground* in comics today or not! .... Again the panelists knew that McCloud was interested in the internet, but they had no idea what he was doing, etc. One of them (I think it was Bryan Talbot) said "In the 70s we were truly doing experimental stuff - changing the way comics looked, etc... I don't think that's happening on the web right now."

With all due respect to Bryan Talbot (his Luther Arkwright books are favorites of mine, and The Tale of One Bad Rat ain't no small potaters, either), if you don't know what's going on, then you don't really have the authority to define it one way or another. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but some opinions are a great deal more robust, informed and researched than others. Granted, I wasn't there, so I don't know what was said, but I'd be tempted agree with you. The internet and web comics may very well quality as a modern version of the "underground comix" movement.

Having said that, I hasten to add that if I had to write an essay on the matter, I'd point out how it's a different movement and has many different characteristics and probably shouldn't be called "underground" because it doesn't share the same set of values, but I would suggest that it is the logical ancestor and inheritor of the underground comix movement.

It would be great if these guys would find that out for themselves and see what they can do. But if they're not happy with webcomics, that's OK- It's not their movement after all. It's ours.

[colin]

I'd point out how it's a different movement and has many different characteristics and probably shouldn't be called "underground" because it doesn't share the same set of values, but I would suggest that it is the logical ancestor and inheritor of the underground comix movement.

I agree with you here. I think one of the major differences is the allowance for diversity on the web - which is going to create many different "movements" (undergrounds?) in themselves. As William Beckerson states

they were so busy trying not to be mainstream they all looked and read the same. They got pretty boring, and fast.

The web is surely not "mainstream", and there are many comic artists here experiementing in many different ways. I think the most interesting thing is that as the technology grows, so will the comics. Therefore the revolution could be spread over many more years than the underground - given the scope.

In regards to what Bryan Talbot et all were saying about webcomics: Talbot was the only one who seemed to have any knowledge of their existence - He tried hard to remember "one that he liked, but forgot the name." But definitely hasn't seen any of the more experimental ones. It seemed to me the webcomics that they had looked at were the ones that looked like they were on paper - but on the web. Which made them dismissive of the prospects. Gilbert also make a remark about "not making any money off the web" (kind of strange coming from a father of the underground). Obviously not familiar with the concept of micro - payments, etc.

[Rip Tanion]

Gilbert [Shelton] also make a remark about "not making any money off the web" (kind of strange coming from a father of the underground).

Kind of strange from a guy who drew a character (Freewheelin' Franklin Freek) that often said, "Dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope."

Unlike Becks, I loved all those 60's Underground Comix. Sure, some of it WAS crap, but a lot of it was genius. There also alot of crap, today, on the webcomics front.

In every genre, during every era, there is always both quality and crap. I think the ratio of crap to quality is greater with webcomics, because it's a lot cheaper to produce a webcomic, than to print one up for distribution. Any no-talent, fool (present company excluded, of course) can post up a webcomic, or what passes for one. I've seen some great comics on the web, even some genius; but I've read far more crap. Maybe, Becks just needs a bong-hit.

[William G]

Hey, I didnt say I didnt like some of them... I said that they were all so busy trying to be non-mainstream that they got repetative fast. Pot jokes, the bomb, and Crumb's sexual deviations are a pretty limited group of subjects to base a legacy on.

We ARE discussing the California hippy comic scene, right? Don't go whipping Metal Hurlant out at me...

[ragtag]

I don't think they are really opposed to web comics, it just seems like they don't know anything about it...so they can't compare it to their old underground comics. One of my favorite old time underground artists actually has a very nice web site, see http://www.howardcruse.com/.

Personally I don't think web comics as a whole are the new underground. Web comics are just a different way to publish comics, with lots of new and unexplored possibilites. Only part of the web comics out there are revolutionary and going where no comics have gone before, both in form and content, while most of it is pretty straight forward and old fashion. My stuff, for instance, is not doing anything revolutinary in form nor content, though the content could be considered a little underground.

Cheers,

Ragnar

http://www.ragtag.net/comix/index.html

[CleverUserName01]

Unlike Becks, I loved all those 60's Underground Comix. Sure, some of it WAS crap, but a lot of it was genius. There also alot of crap, today, on the webcomics front.

In every genre, during every era, there is always both quality and crap. I think the ratio of crap to quality is greater with webcomics, because it's a lot cheaper to produce a webcomic, than to print one up for distribution. Any no-talent, fool (present company excluded, of course) can post up a webcomic, or what passes for one. I've seen some great comics on the web, even some genius; but I've read far more crap.

Like with any art form, it all really comes back to Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap. That is to say, for every nine Salieris, there's just one Mozart.

There were hundreds of super-heroes in the '40s, but today we remember only a couple dozen at best. There were a lot of people puffing the mota and drawing comix in the '60s, but few of them created anything worthwhile or memorable. There are a lot of people today doing webcomix, but few who are doing anything worthwhile or memorable (who falls into which camp is something I can't and won't get into).

I think there are a lot of similarities between the '60s/'70s-era underground movement and the webcomix movement of today - most obviously, in both cases the artists are operating largely under the radar - but I also think it's a gross oversimplification to directly link the two.

The biggest difference, I think, is that webcomix receive a lot more mainstream support (if not attention) than the underground stuff did. In the '60s, Marvel & DC weren't that far removed from the Wertham Witch-hunts and would probably have given anything for the undergrounds to just take their sex and drugs and loose morals and go away, leaving the Big Boys free to create their chipper, Code-approved stories that didn't draw any negative attention to the medium. Today, the web movement has a big-name champion in Scott McCloud and is oriented a lot more towards artistry and storytelling than the pure subversion that was the goal of a lot of the undergrounders.

Maybe, Becks just needs a bong-hit.

Hey, if you're passing it around, smoke me up, dude.

[William G]

I guess I should put on my Snoop Dogg CD when I read this board now...

[Rip Tanion]

Hey, if you're passing it around, smoke me up, dude.

OK, and I'll get you so comastoned that you'll wake up the next day with the interlocking "NY" tatooed on your forehead.

There used to be this pea-brained guy, known as Farmer Ted, who used to hang out in the same bar as me. One day he asked me "Hey, Rippy, ya wanna step outside and smoke some weed?"
"OK, sure." I replied.
To wit he responded, "Ya got any?"

I guess I should put on my Snoop Dogg CD when I read this board now...

Any real stoner knows you got put on some Floyd.

[William G]

I guess I should put on my Snoop Dogg CD when I read this board now...

Any real stoner knows you got put on some Floyd.

Well, I'm thinking of stoners who aint smoking up just to clear their glaucoma.

[Rip Tanion]

My grandfather had glaucoma. They say it's heriditary. So I'm just practicing preventitive medicine...just in case.

Now, put on side two ('member LPs, kids) of Meddle, and blaze up!