-
Agreed, Evens’ colour schemes are very sexy. His washes seem balanced by the line work here; The Wrong Place threw me off a bit because of the total lack of pens.
-
“will make the reader think that someone is paying you for your writing—and we can’t have people thinking that writers get paid”
great line, that was hilarious
-
Like you hinted at, art is sooooo subjective. I’ve never read the comic but from the small samples you’ve provided of his work it looks somewhere between terrible and boring (no offense). But then I don’t really have any context to go on because I have no idea what the tone or mood of the book is.
I’ve had so many arguments on this very site about art quality (amongst other things). And these arguments astound me, literally ASTOUND me, because I can’t believe the person I’m arguing with has fully functioning ocular nerves when they tell me how great Alex Maleev (for example) is, and that person can’t believe I don’t have brain damage when I tell them how horrid his work is. Arguing with people about art is like arguing with aliens about fashion, except no one involved can concede that it’s all a huge waste of time.
Especially me. But I’m glad you found something that spoke to you.
-
…
Caesar, you just used the argument that the OTHER side of your argument is supposed to use. For, like, two different arguments. -
I’d also suggest, Caesar, that the art that appeals to you is narrow. I imagine you’d find Seth’s clean lines “boring” or Adrian Tomine’s art “stiff.”
But both those men are fine cartoonists and you are wrong about their art.
Same with this book, I’ve read Evans and his artwork is transcendent. You don’t get it, fine but it is not boring or awful. It’s expressive, suggestive and not for you.
-
What? No! I’m not “wrong,” there is no “wrong,” that was what I was trying to get at. I’m not trying to start another argument. I was just saying that art is subjective. I was bored and made the observation that art that looks terrible to me is somehow boner-inspiring to some of you, and vice-versa. No attacks here. Sheesh.
I’m not even passing judgment (yet) on the art presented in the article, because I have no context for the story it’s attached to. So maybe it fits the story really well and thus is “good” art for the context – where if you saw a random panel from that comic as a poster on someone’s wall it might look barely adequate or not great.
Also, I reject your suggestion that the spectrum of art I appreciate is narrow, and counter by suggesting that the spectrum of art you appreciate is indiscriminate and without standards. And you will never prove me wrong and I will never prove you wrong because our opinions are equally meaningless.
-
Man. I wrote a post about how art is totally subjective and everyone assumed I was on the warpath. I feel that I need to re-evaluate the decisions I made that got me this unpleasant reputation. Am I really such a confrontational antagonist? Sigh.
-
It may have been because you used extreme words such as “boring” and “terrible” while offering a judgment on something you – admittedly – hadn’t actually fully experience/read. That’s not me be trying to be snarky or confrontational, so much as indicating both those elements can often convey warpath like actions to people.



8 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://www.themondocomics.com/2011/02/brecht-evens-night-animals-reviewed/trackback/