I'm starting today with Tim Eagan's panel, because, with the elections coming up, a certain strain of cartoonist has abandoned actual issues and is going straight for whatever will stir up the booboisie.
Hey, if you're going to have nightmares, that's a classic source for nightmare graphics.
And, no, they don't "all do it." Or, at least, they're all not doing it now. Which is a large part of why the Democrats seem likely to lose control of Congress.
I've got nothing to add, but I've got something you can read. I do think that the Obama administration has been more successful, not only than the rightwing insists (that's not hard), but than you'd think if you listen to the whines of his disappointed one-time-true-believers.
But let's not go overboard. I'm not 100% in line with this guy, but maybe 87.5%. That disappointment in what could have been done is no reason to put the Koch Brothers in power, but it's a pretty good reason not to overinvest in dreams.
See, this is what I mean ...
When I say that Alex is based on the reader actually knowing how business and finance work, today's strip is exactly my point.
What are these cartoonists thinking of? There's no place for nuance in comic strips, dammit.
Certainly, explanations for market movements in comics shouldn't be more complex than the explanations we get from financial reporters.
Ebola. It was ebola. Nothing else.
Just like that holding call in the third quarter is the only reason my team lost yesterday.
Speaking of simple explanations, the reason I'm including today's Rip Haywire is that it cracked me up.
Rip is hiding out and having a little trouble maintaining his cover. Maybe you had to be there, but if you think you'd enjoy a send-up of action heroes and noir detective stories, well, then you ought to be there.
And, speaking of CSI, one of the odd side-effects of being a football fan but rarely watching network prime time is that I get to see promos for TV shows I have never seen, and I have been having the same reaction for years: "Who would watch that?"
Back in the days when they were doing live promos for "Punky Brewster," I mostly wondered why they were pushing a kids' show to a football audience. Now my response is a little darker, because I watch the clips and ponder the overwhelming sense of dread that is being peddled.
I also tend to go into Holden Caulfield phony-spotting mode when I see Hollywood types pretending to be tough and hard-boiled. The grittier these cop shows try to be, the more I think of "Charlie's Angels" and my late mother-in-law's hilarious "Freeze!" imitation of Farrah Fawcett-Majors.
We're not supposed to giggle anymore, but it's just weird to see a tough, no-nonsense crime show in which the tough, no-nonsense crimebuster is Sam-freakin'-Malone.
Though, come to think of it, if they ever made Rip Haywire into a TV series, he'd be perfect!
Everything Old is New Again
Gocomics is now running Little Nemo in Slumberland.
As zombie strips go, it's pretty good.
Breaking news not from the comics world, where its existence is no longer news, but from the world of books: Roz Chast's "Can't We Talk About Something More Pleasant" is up for a National Book Award, not for "best graphic anything" but for non-fiction, pure and simple. As well it should be.
1. When this came out, it seemed the publicity focused on the need to talk to elderly parents about end-of-life decisions, and, yes, communication and end-of-life are the points around which the book is centered.
However, it is a far more searing look at a very difficult and painful relationship that was fraught from the start and I wasn't prepared for the trip. Which is not to say I'm sorry I read it. Wow.
I scanned this particular page because, for about a year and a half, I dated a woman whose mother had Alzheimer's and, after initially thinking that she should have been more patient with the poor old lady, realized that I had dropped in at this stage and, for me, that's who she was. Beth had to deal not only with who she had been, but with the fact that she was her mother, not just some dotty old woman.
I've seen it several times since, one time closer, other times further away, but never without thinking of that dynamic and the additional baggage it brings to something that wasn't going to be fun to begin with.
I don't know which I admire more, Chast's perspective on it all, or her frankness in laying it out, but this is some tough, challenging stuff just for the reader, never mind what it must have been like to produce it.
2. There's a whole nomenclature thing going on here. I've seen the book described as a "graphic novel" and it most assuredly is not that. If it's a graphic-anything, it's a "graphic memoir," the difference between truth and fiction being critical -- sculptures and paintings are both "art," but you don't use the terms interchangeably.
Since I work with book reviewers between the ages of 8 and 14, I've had to deal with this necessary distinction, so last month, when I was in Kenosha, I asked "Big Nate" creator Lincoln Peirce what the term is.
He admitted that it's still a live topic, but said that they are using the term "hybrid," which works for me.
Anyway, Chast isn't up for an award for graphic novels or graphic memoirs or hybrids. She's up for non-fiction. That's as it should be.
I hope she wins.
Juxtaposition of the Day.
Just thought I'd leave you with something warm and fuzzy.
And threadbare and moldy.