Found

I recall many years ago reading an interview with John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten of The Sex Pistols) in a Smash Hits magazine. He mentioned that one of his early jobs was working in the sewers. The interviewer asked what he did there. "Were you killing rats?" he asked.

"No", Lydon answered, "I was studying humanity".

Ok, so this piece isn't quite so harsh as that, but along similar lines. It concerns a gem I discovered on another one of my date nights at the Indigo magazine room.

"Found Magazine" is a collection of just that: stuff people have found. Papers littering the sidewalk, things pulled from garbage cans or recycle bins, forgotten stuff that's left behind on a bus seat or a park bench. They could be letters, resumes, flyers, birthday cards, shopping lists, notebooks or cassette tapes. The only criteria seems to be that (a) it was discovered somewhere and that (b) the original author/owner is not known to the person who found it. The magazine publishes photocopies of the found items, usually including a brief note as to where the item was found, or an a bit of conjecture about the meaning of the item.

This is modern day archaeology, askewed.

"Found" is a profound look at the mundane. It takes the ephemera of everyday life out of context, and through the absence of context assigns new meaning. Each piece becomes its own little mystery and your mind begins to fill-in the blanks with the "who, what, where, when and why". Sometimes the result is hilarious. Sometimes it's terrifying. Sometimes it's downright poetic. Truthfully, there is more meaningful observation in these pages than I've seen in a few literary journals. The best way to describe "Found" is "incongruous". In what seems like garbage one can find strange insight into the human condition.

If you're the voyeuristic type (and really, who isn't?) some of the stuff reprinted in the magazine is fascinating. For example, check out this note left on a windshield in a weird case of mistaken identity. From out of this one simple bit of poison pen, a human drama unfolds...

As they say, "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned", but notice the "page me later"...? She still loves him. This girl is seriously conflicted.

Issue #1 includes a poignant look at things found from the World Trade Centre after 9/11, which is surprisingly respectful, not stooping to morbid curiosity. There's also an interview with indie comic artist / author Lynda Barry, who is a self-proclaimed "scrounger" of found things. Another point of interest in this issue is "Cheeseburger in Paradise": a travel journal logging a particularly bland vacation in Hawaii. It becomes interesting when you begin to see the author partially as the typical "ugly American" stereotype, but also as just simple person with a mundane yet somehow satisfying life, and small aspirations.

If you're the type of person who likes to look for meaning in life's small moments, you'll love "Found". But it's not all deep: some of it is just baffling, goofy shit. I'm dying to listen to "Booty Time by the Ypsilanti All-Starz", a found cassette of 14 booty-rap anthems. And I'm anxiously awaiting the upcoming special issue of "Found" that promises to reprint the 40 page letter (!) by the paranoid license-plate woman.

http://www.foundmagazine.com/

"Secrets in the Shadows: The Art & Life of Gene Colan" by Tom Field

"Gene's work is like the seam on a black stocking -- a glimpse of it leads you to want to see more, and yet you can't, and you're seduced into looking harder. This has to be played softly; it should never look like it's trying too hard."

- from the introduction by Glen David Gold

When I read the above quote in the introduction to "Secrets in the Shadows: The Art & Life of Gene Colan" I realized why I have always been attracted to Colan's artwork. In the overly exaggerated 4 colour world of comic book art where the standard was set by the bold, forceful graphics of Jack Kirby, and later evolved into the more aggressive, "in your face" styles of hotshot artists like Rob Liefeld or Todd McFarland, Gene Colan stands apart with his subtle, atmospheric tones and the soft interplay of light and shadows. It is often said that a great storyteller won't just "show you" what's going on but rather draw you into their world. This is the source of Gene Colan's greatness. And he doesn't beat you over the head with it! His pencils can convey so much through mood and impression; whether it is the mysterious astral plane of Doctor Strange or down foggy alleyways in search of Dracula, Colan's art can give you a wonderfully disoriented and decidedly creepy feeling!


As I've mentioned before, I tend to shy away from biographies... but I will read them when they lean more toward an insightful career retrospective. "Secrets in the Shadows" is a terrific example of this. Sure, a significant chunk of the opening part of the book is biography but even it is supplemented by lots of early artwork and meaningful anecdotes. Fields presents a delightful contrast, introducing us to an extremely timid and fretful boy -- afraid of the dark, the dead, and even afraid of an antique chair! -- who became the man whose name would be forever linked with one of the most evil characters in all of horror. Without dallying too long, the book gives us a quick but succinct account of Colan's early days in the military and as a young artist in the burgeoning comics industry in the 50s and 60s. Then we get to the reason we all came to the party: his work at Marvel.

The real "prize inside" of the book are the chapters "in conversation" with Colan and his greatest collaborators: Stan Lee, Tom Palmer, Steve Gerber, and his wife, Adrienne Colan. Here you get a glimpse of "Gentleman Gene" and the people who understood his talent and helped to bring out the best in his work. Until I read this book, I guess I never realized how misunderstood and under appreciated Colan's art is, and how viciously maligned it was by a few well known comic creators. (Suffice to say I lost a lot of respect for John Byrne after reading this book!) The book also includes a fun little experiment wherein different artists (including Byrne!) attempt to ink over Colan's pencils, showing what a difficult task that can be, surely giving fans a renewed appreciation for the skills of Tom Palmer! One piece in the book that I found particularly interesting shows the same scene from "Stewart the Rat" done by artist Tom Sutton and as done by Colan, effectivley illustrating the difference in pacing and storytelling technique.

Whether you're a fan or a detractor of Colan's art, "Secrets in the Shadows" will help you gain a greater appreciation of his unique style. There's really no secret as to which camp I belong... and this seems like a good time to show off a piece from my personal collection: a Gene Colan original featuring Dr Strange vs Dracula!

Magazine Review - "Under the Radar"

Ever since I gave up my campus radio shows a few years ago -- and with it my CD reviewing duties for the programming committee -- I feel completely out of the loop where new music is concerned. Although admittedly most of the CDs I had to review back then were a real chore to listen to, occasionally I'd find a diamond in the rough. Some of the artists I discovered then have stuck with me (notably Jay Jay Johanson, Mum, and Chromeo) but most were completely forgettable or at best marginally interesting. Since then, my exposure to new music comes mainly by word of mouth, recommendation from friends, or sometimes through serendipity on the Internet.

Occasionally I flip through magazines on my weekly visits to Indigo, scanning for anything that might pique my interest. My favourite music mag is "Uncut" because for one thing it's British and my musical tastes tend to be more Euro flavoured than American. Also "Uncut" features a nice, long retrospective of an iconic band from the past. Usually the free sampler CD (another bonus!) features cover versions of that iconic band by current artists. (So, simple logic: If a new band covered a David Bowie song, their sound will likely be Bowie-influenced and ergo as a Bowie fan, I may enjoy this new band too.) But I digress, this isn't about "Uncut"...

"Under The Radar" is a new discovery for me. It's an American alternative music and pop culture magazine, reasonably priced at $4.99. What drew my eye was the cover: though full colour, it is matte finished, not glossy. For some reason that simple feature caught my attention, as if it inexplicably gave it a bit of indie "cred" somehow. I flipped through and it interested me enough to buy it.

Two things I notice about the music scene in general these days. First, there are a LOT of indie bands out there, and they all pretty much strike me as the same. Secondly, the press is almost by it's definition, advertising. The music industry is an "industry", after all. There's really nothing wrong with that. So, I read pretty much every article and review as an advertisement. What is this artist selling? For the most part, it's nothing I'd care to buy. Usually music that is described by phrases like "60s psychedelia", "frequent tempo changes" and "wall of sound guitars" doesn't interest me. Most bands even look the same: take a handful of 20-somethings, poorly groomed, dressed in kitschy thrift shop used clothes, and take a "candid" shot of them holding quirky old props or sitting on worn-out basement furniture. I guess I just miss the package and polish of the 80s. Nevertheless, I'm willing to give anyone points for at least trying to be creative or artistic so I'll try to take a look beyond the packaging & see if the product inside is something I'd like to buy. Usually I scan reviews for clues & catchwords that might tip me off to something I'd like (eg, "electro", "Kraftwerk-inspired", "futuristic", etc.).

Getting back to "Under the Radar" specifically, there were some things in this magazine that I genuinely liked. There's an interview with Depeche Mode about their new album, "Sounds of the Universe". There's a one-page bit from Flight of the Conchords, whom I love and also a short interview with Aziz Ansari from "Human Giant". This issue also had a really fun article called "The Future Ain't What is Used to Be" where they looked at "near future" science fiction movies (eg, the year 1997 in "Escape from New York," "Freejack" in 2009) and compared their vision of the future, technology, etc with what we actually have today. There's also DVD reviews and Comic Book reviews (Hey! Darwyn Cooke did some art in "Jonah Hex vol 5: Bullets Don't Lie". Also, a review of "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen vol 3: Century" that I am looking forward to reading.)

There's also a rather superficial piece written by Eddie Argos from Art Brut about his love of DC comics. (I still don't understand his current team-up with Black Box Recorder.) I found out that Karin Dreijer Anderson from The Knife has a new solo album. One interesting feature in the magazine is called "Self Portrait", where artists submit a photo they're taken of themselves and provide a list of personal facts and trivia. As an aside, it appears that the same creative team seem to wear many hats in the making of the magazine: I noticed one of the publishers is also the creative director, designer, and a photographer. The other publisher shares the same last name, and is also an editor of many of the features. So, I'm guessing this is probably a creative labour of love for the people who make this magazine. If so, good for them!

It's also available online so check it out at www.undertheradarmag.com

Book Review - “Strange and Stranger: The World of Steve Ditko” - Blake Bell

Typically I try to avoid biographies, no matter whether they are “auto”, “official” or “unauthorized”. My reason is basically this: the less I know about a personality, the less that knowledge interferes with my enjoyment of their work. The more I know about the creator the less I can focus on the creation “in and of itself“ without having my opinion coloured by the personality of the artist, the behind the scenes anecdotes, mundane bits of trivia, and so on.
Add to that, when we know the subject of a biography is protective of their privacy, it just seems a bit too voyeuristic prying into that which they do not wish to share. And being one of the most reclusive figures in pop culture, it’s more than likely that Steve Ditko would rather this book didn’t exist.


Steve Ditko is best known as the co-creator of Spider-Man, as well as other iconic Marvel comics characters such as Dr. Strange, as well as DC & Charlton’s The Creeper, Hawk & Dove, The Question, etc. Creation and ownership being contentious issues in the silver age of comics, he likely had a hand in the design and/or development of many more. Naturally, the struggle for proper credit & fair compensation is central to any story of comic artists of the period. The story of Ditko adds another more interesting wrinkle: Objectivism.


Without delving too much into the complicated philosophy of Ayn Rand, suffice to say at it’s core Objectivism emphasizes the individual over the collective; the importance of human intellect, productive work and art to the human existence, and applies the standard of rational choice to ethics. One principle of Objectivism is the “Law of Identity”, that is: a thing “is what it is”, there cannot be duplicity. As Rand states, “A is A”. For adherents to Objectivism, morality is black and white (in a nutshell: good cannot be evil, nor vice versa… so a thing must be one or the other, it cannot be both.). The Law of Identity weighs most heavily on the career of Ditko, becoming the basis of his most controversial creation, Mr. A.


Getting back to the book, you can see how the Objectivist line of thinking might appeal to a shy, withdrawn artistic type: especially to one who feels he and his work are being exploited by his corporate employer. It’s not a stretch to see how that situation might be aggravated into a vicious circle: the growing immersion in a philosophy / the worsening of bitterness at his perceived exploiters / the stronger his adherence to his moral code, and so on. Blake Bell effectively shows us the widening gyre. Disputes with comics insiders over ownership and accusations of theft. Alienation from comics fans. A declining work ethic for anything other than his personal projects leads to declining quality and dwindling output. A staunch moral code encroaches on his creativity, fuelling a need to “enlighten” rather than “entertain“. Ultimately, the story is tragic. We’re left feeling outraged on behalf of Ditko, but at the same time frustrated by him (eg. Why would he turn down an opportunity to illustrate “The Fountainhead”?)

Bell creates a compelling profile, interspersed nicely with artwork to illustrate how changes in attitude affected changes in output. The book provides an ample sampling of Ditko art, from early material and the heyday of Marvel to his more current works like Static & Avenging World. The most appealing are his signature psychedelic mindscapes and some stand out inks & washes for 60s horror publisher Warren. The most heartbreaking are the colouring books, toy packaging and fast food restaurant promos from the 80s & 90s.

As far as biographies go, this one spends little time on the personal life of its subject; there are few details available anyhow. (Is it just me, or do the few existing photos of Ditko bear an uncanny resemblance to young Peter Parker?) “Strange and Stranger” presents something more interesting than simple biography: the epic story of an uncompromising hero assailed by corporate greed; his unwillingness to compromise in his staunch moral code and how his principles may have contributed to his eventual downfall. A secret pleasure of mine is to imagine Steve Ditko cast in the role of Number 6 in the tv show “The Prisoner”: Uncompromising, unmutual, a lone voice crying out for the right to be individual, desperately protecting his intellectual property (information) from the grabbing hands of the comics industry Village. (Can’t you just hear Stan Lee’s familiar voice as the taunting Number 2...? “By hook or by crook, we will!”). Well, a girl can dream, can't she?



Steve Ditko reminds you to "THINK".






(Naturally, all images are copyright of their respective owners and are used here solely for the purposes of review!)

CD Review - “Years of Refusal” (2009) - Morrissey

Since I've started off this blog with Morrissey, might as well continue in the same vein!

“Years of Refusal” is an appropriate title for me, since I largely boycotted 2006‘s “Ringleader of the Tormentors”. Admittedly I never really gave it a fair shake. This new effort is what I’d describe as “more”. It’s got more of the things we’ve come to expect from Morrissey lately…. only a bit more cozy, a bit more raw in sound, a bit more strained (especially the vocals). And, it seems as Moz grows more at ease (see “That‘s How People Grow Up“), more immersed in his American/Mexican fan base (see Latin guitar & brass on “When Last I Spoke to Carol”), and perhaps more comfortable sexually (see “It‘s Not Your Birthday Anymore”), he seems to be falling into complacency. And he’s ok with that. But as T.S. Eliot once said, “Anxiety is the hand maiden of creativity”, thus contentment brings artistic sterility. A lot of Morrissey’s lyrical themes & imagery repeat from previous albums (geez, again about the taxman?) and things start feeling a bit stale. But then, that’s what we’re all here for, right? Would anyone who is not a long-time fan even look at a Morrissey album now? The track “All You Need Is Me” presents a poignant comment upon his fans and detractors:

“I was a small fat child in a welfare house,
there was only one thing I ever dreamed about
and fate has just handed it to me,
Whoopee!
You don’t like me but you love me
Either way, you’re wrong
You’re gonna miss me when I’m gone.”

A common criticism of Moz of late is that he’s gotten “too happy”, comparing The Smiths and his initial solo efforts to what he’s doing today. That is a bit unfair and we should try to think of the two as completely separate entities. I mean, the man turns 50 this year; can we really expect him to sustain the angst of a 20 year old forever? In the aptly named track “You Were Good in Your Time”, he succinctly sums up my feelings about his early career :

“You made me feel less alone
You made me feel not quite so
deformed, uninformed and hunchbacked…
You said more in one day
than most people say
in a lifetime,
it was our time
and we thank you.”

So, judging “Years of Refusal” purely on it’s own merits, my favourite tracks are “Something is Squeezing My Skull”(which includes a nice litany of the various medications he has been taking), “All You Need is Me” and “One Day Goodbye Will Be Farewell”.

(The image and all lyrics quoted for the purposes of review are copyright of Morrissey, naturally!)