A Smattering of Sketches

I whipped this one out in a church meeting a while back. I decided I wanted to start putting together more character ideas in case I ever get one of those comic stories I wanna do off the ground.

Angelo here turned out pretty well, despite some... questionable... wardrobe choices (one of those little notes says "Long sleeves? No." Technically, I think that's supposed to be a wife-beater under the jacket).

I do have to say, though, that I'm fond of that hair.


More experimentation... I picked up a set of markers in different shades of gray, thinking I could use them to do some pseudo-coloring. So, yeah, the above picture is supposed to look like that. I'm not sure how well I like it.

Once I finished with the picture, though, I got a better idea of how I'd want to do the layout - a bit less traditional. I think I'll try it again.


While inking this one, I shook out one of my markers to get a bit more "oomph" out of it... only to completely fill the lid up with ink. Whoops. Silhouettes aren't as easy to draw as I expected. The naked old guy turned out pretty well.

Maybe I shouldn't have pointed out that he's naked...


One more experiment, this time with some sepia colored markers I'd picked up. For better results in the future, I may use these on a tan-colored paper, rather than the plain white. Also, I think I'll have to be more adventurous with the shading to really take advantage of this set.

I'd totally buy that poster, though.

Animal Instinct

I have a lot of opinions, some of them well thought-out and researched, others based completely on knee-jerk reactions to limited information. Here's something that probably falls into the latter camp:

I hate zoos. I like that the IDEA behind zoos is benign - educate the masses (especially children) on the world around them, raise environmental awareness, protect and perpetuate endangered species... All this is good and noble.

I just can't help but feel that there's a better way to go about these goals than to lock up thousands of creatures in cages to be leered at by a rowdy public.

I first started questioning the morality of zoos back in about '03 or '04, while I was living in Bratislava on a church mission. I went to the local zoo there, and the way these animals had been treated... left something to be desired. Some of the smaller animals, like the meerkats, were in these shallow pits with signs that said "Please do not disturb the animals" - which, of course, the hyperactive 19-year-old boys I was with ignored.

The most striking image from that zoo trip, though, was of a sickly lioness, whose coat was ragged and falling out. One of her eyes was completely black. She sat, unresponsive, with a long string of saliva hanging unnoticed from her mouth.

I recognize that most zoos do make an effort to care for their animals, but, even so, I can't help but wonder whether human beings have a RIGHT to put other animals into captivity like this.

My good friend Dashbo asked me once, in correlation to this same idea, whether I thought it would be ethical, if the human race were facing extinction, to take men and women, put them together, and force them to reproduce. I thought about it for a minute, but, ultimately, I decided that it just didn't feel right.

(Yet another reason why I don't ever want to get set up - DATINGZING!)

I have similar misgivings about the practice of keeping pets. Domesticizing animals feels far too much like slavery. Often, animals are domesticated to fulfill a particular ROLE - dogs help hunters track down game, cats keep rodents away, cows provide milk, etc. Honestly, those practices don't bother me too much, provided the animals are treated well. When they're not... well, that's not a subject I feel like I can tackle.

What BOTHERS me, though, are those animals that are kept around solely for companionship and then mistreated. I'm not even talking about animal abuse - there's not even the tiniest sliver of grey in that area. I went for a walk the other day, and I passed a house that kept a couple of dogs in the yard. The dogs, as they do, ran up to the fence and started barking at me, only for the owner to come out onto the porch and yell, angrily, "No barking! Get back here!"

I don't really want to be barked at (no one does), but I just wonder if it's really RIGHT to keep an animal around and demand that it not act like an animal.

Now, I am Christian, and I do believe that God gave man dominion over the whole earth. It's the DEFINITION of that dominion that I struggle with. I don't believe it's right or just to just use up all the resources of the earth - we are meant to CARE for creation, not waste it. The same holds true for animals - just because we CAN lock up a dalmation in a chain-link dog run doesn't mean we should.

But maybe I'm just overthinking things again.

Braddy Takes On the DC Reboot

Yet another post on a subject nobody but me cares about...

DC Comics, the publishers of some of the longest running superhero magazines (including the first superhero, Superman, and my love Batman), plans to reboot their entire line of stories, taking everything back to #1 in September. That means new origins, new stories, and new costumes for their entire lineup. A lot of people are complaining that this completely gets rid of nearly 70 years of stories and worldbuilding, all for the sake of MAYBE attracting some new readers.

Personally, I don't think this is a big deal. See, stories are good regardless of whether they have 50 years of consistent storytelling behind them. Besides, thanks to the reboot, we're going to get that Frankenstein series that would have been such a good idea after the Seven Soldiers series five years ago.


Sorry, but I'm a sucker for a monster with a giant gun and an affinity for Milton.

That said, I'm not thrilled with everything that's going down. For example, they're making some pretty dramatic changes to the character Barbara Gordon, also known as Oracle:


Right now, Oracle's about the only high-profile disabled character in superhero comics. She's a positive role-model in a genre that typically treats women with something... less than respect.

Barbara Gordon was the original Batgirl, though, so walk again she must! Nevermind the fact that she's a full-grown woman now. Let's put her back in the purple suit!


Admittedly, that purple costume is one of the most iconic images in the history of Batman (even if it's iconic for a generation now preparing for retirement), so that return makes some sense.

But then we get to the character Harley Quinn, the Joker's henchgirl, and...


Okay, WHAT the heck?!

Look, I know the character's original look on the right there isn't ENTIRELY tasteful, but GEEZ! The updated Harley Quinn's just all about fanservice now. She may as well just be a stripper.

Now I KNOW that, just because a woman chooses to display some of her... ahem... attributes, that doesn't automatically make her a stripper. However, I strongly doubt that this new costume (designed by Jim Lee, co-publisher of DC Comics) was really meant to empower a woman ALREADY DRESSED UP IN A SKINTIGHT JUMPSUIT.

This is the type of thing that makes me embarrassed to admit I like superhero comics.

Even the non-sexually exploitative costumes look pretty silly. Here are the Teen Titans, a group of characters I don't really care about (except in one form):


Is there ANYONE who can tell me why Superboy has a piece of paper taped to his back?

These character designs look straight out of the 1990s - which shouldn't be surprising, considering that's when Jim Lee got to be so popular with his X-Men character designs (the ones you may recognize from the old X-Men cartoon). The trouble is, though, that the 90s were a pretty crappy time for comic books, with some severely misguided attempts at "extreme" storytelling and many design decisions springing from a desire to make their characters "look cool."


Above: 90s Comics

Getting (finally) to the point: I think the reboot's probably a good idea, from a storytelling perspective. Why not give writers the opportunity to build these characters from a fresh beginning? We could get some good new stories. But, seriously, did they HAVE to saddle so many characters with utterly baffling and unflattering looks?

In the end, I have to say that the DC Reboot isn't really going to change the way I buy comics. I tend to wait until the stories come out in trade paperback, anyway, rather than buying the single issues. I won't be branching out into Teen Titans or Batgirl or Harley Quinn and Her Amazing Wonder Corset, but I don't really buy those NOW, so DC's not really out any of my money.

I may have to check out that Frankenstein series, though.

Fantasy Jobs

These aren't dream jobs. A "dream" is a goal, an aspiration. It's something you can point to and say, "NOW I'm accomplished!"

Either that, or it's a wish your heart makes.

No, these are FANTASY jobs - the ones that I have zero intention of working towards, but, man, wouldn't it be awesome if somehow the necessary skills were bestowed upon me!

The answer, of course, is yes. Yes, it WOULD be awesome.

Orchestral Conductor


Painter


Rock Star

Caveat Emptor... NERD

I haven't really been a fan of the X-Men comics since I was a kid (and, even then, I really only watched the television show). However, with all the hype surrounding the new X-Men movie, I decided to go out and pick up some comics to see if I could find something to catch my fancy.

I grabbed the storyline written by one of my favorite writers, Grant Morrison (who I love so much for basically filling his stories with pure creative insanity). So I read through the arc, and... well, I got basically what I wanted. The story was full of high-concept villains, perfect twists on the mundane, and Morrison's signature fragmented storytelling.

The story's so fragmented, actually, that I nearly didn't notice that there are 30 pages missing from the book.

Good thing I kept the receipt.

A Few Good Artists

There came a time not too long ago when I decided not to get all embarrassed about the fact that I'm a grown man with a deep and abiding love for something commonly considered to be a child's medium - the comic book. It's a decision I'm glad I've made. I came to comics for the capes, but I've stuck around for some real top-notch visual storytelling.

Recently, I've come to appreciate how much good art really sells and enhances the story (ironically, comic art is one of the reasons I've been embarassed about being a comics fan in the past - but that's a subject for another time). Pardon me, then, while I share a few of my favorite artists with you.


Skottie Young
Website: http://www.skottieyoung.com/
Noteworthy Book: The Wonderful Wizard of Oz


A lot of mainstream comics have recently been shooting for a photo-realistic quality to their artwork, which, you know, is kinda cool. However, I've found that, when I read comics, I want something a little more stylized. That's where Skottie Young delivers.

Most of his work comes with this scratchy, almost sketch-like linework around the edges. I've seen it in a couple of artists, and I've tried to emulate it myself at times. The finished product has a rough feel to it, but it's calculated and precise - rather than coming off sloppy, Young's artwork feels relaxed, like a cruise liner.

Plus, his character designs are just superb. Who WOULDN'T love that li'l Scarecrow guy?


Mike Mignola
Website: http://www.artofmikemignola.com/
Noteworthy Book: The Hellboy Series

I first stumbled across stories back in my prudish days, when I couldn't even SAY the word "hell" without blushing at the swears. Now that I've given the stories a fair shake, they've wound up surprising me quite a bit.

Mignola's artwork is subtly atmospheric - kind of a big surprise for a guy who writes about a demon from hell punching monsters in the face. He covers his characters in heavy black shadows to give everything that creepy, mysterious sensation. Mignola also enhances the sense of place in his works by occasionally slipping in extra panels showing details from the architecture around where the action's taking place.

The man's best known for Hellboy, but The Amazing Screw-On Head is also worth the read. Also, you should note that the man knows how to draw a mean monkey.


Jill Thompson
Website: http://jillthompson.blogspot.com/
Noteworthy Book: Beasts of Burden

Jill Thompson actually may be most famous for her work on The Sandman, but I'm probably the only comics reader who doesn't care for that series. Rather, I've highlighted her work on Beasts of Burden, an absolutely fantastic story about mystery-solving animals (think Bunnicula, except actually scary). I don't see much watercolor work in comics, but what I've seen is remarkably effective. I seriously don't know how else one would draw ghosts without them.

Like Mignola, Thompson creates some wonderfully atmospheric pieces, taking full advantage of the palette of colors available to her. When the mood darkens, so does the color. She also has a neat trick of swirling in words into the background on occasion - a trick I've always loved.

I've actually not yet checked out her other most famous work, Scary Godmother, but I'll be sure to do so soon.

"Stop It." THAT'S What She Said

I love funny. Seriously, comedy serves a very important purpose in my life. I'm even of the opinion that a well-placed joke at the right time can do wonders for a person's soul.

That's right - I'm mixing humor and spirituality, and if you think there's nothing funny about spirituality, you obviously haven't read this.

Seriously, even the NAME "St. Francis of Assisi" is hilarious!

Now, I'm not all about "Rabbi, Priest, and Bishop" jokes, nor do I think the only jokes we should laugh at are the ones that people would feel comfortable sharing in a chapel (actually, I find most of those jokes offensively bland and refuse to laugh at them as a matter of principle). Going one step further, I have to say that I like my jokes a little... vulgar?

There's something about "off-color" humor - especially in my little, Mormon-conservative environment - that people find to be exciting in the same way that anything that's forbidden is funny. I fall victim to this all the time - I think profanity is HILARIOUS, and I treat the "That's what she said" joke as a test of my own skill and wit.

(For the record, I gave up "That's what she said" jokes after a New Year's resolution and I'm still going strong).

To me, profanity is a strong spice. Too much of it, and you'll smell like garlic for days. However, in just the right amount, some cussin' makes for good comedy. I know I should probably be indignant at the use of profanity, but, heaven help me, around some comedians I can't help myself.

The trouble is, though, that, in our era of ever-relaxing morality, the line you have to cross to be "transgressive" is further and further out there. As a result, off-color jokes get more and more... disgusting. Spend any amount of time on internet forums and you've probably seen this - people use language of intense violence and sexual depravity with incredible ease. Every time a new movie comes out, I hear people talk about how this director or that producer is "raping my childhood." Sadly, I think these metaphors show that we've lost something more important than our sense of "decency." We've lost our empathy - our ability to feel for and respect the feelings of others.

Jokes about "rape" are a strong example. I know one or two people who have been the victims of rape and I have to say... that's REALLY not funny. When we joke about something, we trivialize the subject matter to the point where it's meaningless and hollow. That's why you almost never hear jokes about both Nazis and Jews - at least, not from someone you ever plan on speaking to again.

I've heard it said that comedy, by its very nature, is subversive and offensive. No matter what the subject matter - blondes, blacks, or bar mitzvahs - SOMEONE will get offended. I'm sure that's true, to some extent - especially of parody, which I love and strongly encourage. The barbs of parody usually serve a purpose, though, beyond objectifying or tearing-down another.

Of course, I last heard the argument that "comedy = subversion" used in a workshop a couple of years ago to justify a cancer joke. However, the cancer joke made one of the workshop participants run out into the hall in tears. Apparently, she had a relative recently diagnosed with cancer, so she was hurt to hear the subject treated so cavalierly. So the workshop instructor came across looking like a complete tool.

Do I mean to say that I can't ever make jokes about cancer? Well... maybe I do. At the very least, though, I think I can show more consideration for those who ARE upset by a joke and not make it in their presence. Maybe that doesn't make me virtuous, but it does make me kind (not that I mean to brag about how kind I am... you get my point).

Bottom line: "No" means "no." Even in comedy.

You may now leave obscene posts in the comments section.