“Immature artists imitate, mature artists steal.” - Lionel Trilling
I’m going to expand a bit more on an earlier post about getting ideas. Rather than sitting around staring at the blank sheet of Bristol and sweating blood, there are time-honored methods at generating material. At times my brain is like an empty bird-feeder; ideas flutter around aimlessly, nothing really seems to get a grip and start digging in. Usually that’s a problem that lies within my thinking process – it’s not that there’s an absence of stuff out there, I just need to free things up and get into the groove. Techniques I've previously covered include experimenting with wordplay and free-association exercises, and also the potentially thornier topics of appropriation and the related concept of "floating lyrics," what I think accounts for the analogy of recurrent motifs popping up in both music (lyrics and notes) and art.
There's an awfully fine line between inspiration and emulation, homage and cop-out, derivative of and plagiarized from, and influenced by and ripping off.
For example, one of the few cartoons to actually make me, grim, jaded bastard that I am, laugh out loud in recent years is the webcomic created by Dan Walsh "Garfield Minus Garfield," encapsulates the difficulty in categorizing such overlaps and making judgements (a side-note in that Garfield creator Jim Davis was gracious enough to give his blessing on this series).
For example, one of the few cartoons to actually make me, grim, jaded bastard that I am, laugh out loud in recent years is the webcomic created by Dan Walsh "Garfield Minus Garfield," encapsulates the difficulty in categorizing such overlaps and making judgements (a side-note in that Garfield creator Jim Davis was gracious enough to give his blessing on this series).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/97c0e/97c0e425e8412fd91b5c1dab795867cad4b5c6c4" alt=""
Personally I try and avoid reading most other cartoons, particularly contemporary ones; not just because I don’t really enjoy them (I do) or have the time (I don't), but because I don't want to muddy the water from the well that I draw from. In other words, I get paranoid that looking at someone else’s idea will plant a seed deep down in my subconscious where it will germinate, and many years later long after I’ve forgotten the original I’ll erroneously claim it as my own. Lost count of how often I cringe at seeing a panel by a more famous cartoonist that is either the same exact joke as one that I’ve drawn or close enough to draw obvious comparison to. I get stressed out just thinking about the potential accusations of plagiarism even though I’ve never before even seen the other guy’s, or had drawn mine long before theirs.
I’ll never forget an instance while I was working at a copy shop and this old-timer dude who was a fan of my work brought in an old pornographic magazine, one of the really sleazy ones like Cherry or Hustler, and gleefully displayed a cartoon of a seal clubbing a baby. Well, that happened to be one of my trademark pieces at that time, one that had achieved a small amount of notoriety for me, and needless to say I was righteously indignant at the implied assumption. Besides which, I only read Playboy, and yes, just for the cartoons.
I recall years ago having folks occasionally come up to me and say I was ripped off by someone else; “hey man, he totally copied you dude” – you’d think that living in the biggest state there’d be more than enough room for everyone at the cartoon table. But when you are dealing with a certain demographic (Alaska) and your material covers the same territory (ex: bears, moose, other animals, nature themes and the outdoors etc.) there’s bound to be some inevitable overlap. You learn to laugh it off, like much of life - it's an occupational instinct. There's only so many “blown a seal” mechanic gags to go around the North I suppose, just like endless variations on desert island/psychiatrist couch/etc, gags. Plus there’s (fortunately) only one Sarah Palin, but she seems to be a remarkably inexhaustible and dependable source of inspiration. At any rate, I've caught a couple outstanding rip-offs of my own stuff from some local amateurs, and if I wasn't such a hardass teacher I'd be more flattered, as I usually wind up critiquing their awful technique instead.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7723b/7723b34efba905808fde6adcb884b14a0fd06bba" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b5a8f/b5a8f32c964b9ef549391f510e5ec5a52f9b0dce" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4939b/4939b62063fd84ecd99842597f728d58e3f7bb8c" alt=""
Now here's another sample of a piece from when I just so happened to be in a copy-shop next to a woman who was making xeroxes of an obviously butchered plagiarism of a panel, and next to it the variation I spun using our own local species of rodent. Again, this would be what I'd call a decent example of switching, ie far enough removed from the original that there's no possible connection.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7a37f/7a37f9151f49287d46307f743a1576ba040e3cb9" alt=""
For me, there has always been something so deeply satisfying and creatively gratifying at the accomplishment of bagging a really good bad gag, one that is your and yours alone – laying claim to being the first one to come up with a joke so bad that nobody else could have possibly gone there, is for me the ultimate reward of a job well done.
Though I do often wonder what would happen if I ever found myself in the position of having to come up with seven times the amount of material I do for Nuggets, plus knocking a home-run with every single one; probably have to take everything a lot more seriously than I already do. I shudder to think of the absolute bombs regular long-time followers of my feature have had to slog through over the past twenty + years in this paper - having to do only a weekly panel you'd think it'd be at least seven times funnier. Posted here is another good example culled from my archive of what I'd term an homage, since the source material is so well known it's an obvious parody, with apologies to Gustave Doré:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3b685/3b6853b8f06b55fecaf9309cf1e061d495a54afa" alt=""
Now there’s always going to be someone who will criticize an overlap in content, overt or otherwise, or stylistic similarities between your work and someone else's. Hell, even the fact that I do a single panel cartoon is more than enough to damn me as a Far Side copy in some people’s eyes. I suppose that Gary Larson's work might have been an influence, as his cartoon started around 1982, and I had begun experimenting with the single-panel format for a student newspaper at the community college I attended a couple years later. But right when I was beginning to draw comics seriously in high-school the big thing for me was the underground comix scene and MAD magazine. Canny observers can easily spot the tracks left all over my work from those pivotal influences. But again, comparisons are inevitable, I try and have the good graces to let occasional comments from either direction (whose work looks like whose) roll off my back; it's as inevitable as getting mixed up with "the other guy" which just goes with the territory. And besides, in a moment I'll point out an obvious example with regards to my own influence.
Sure enough, at anyone’s success the vultures will begin to circle, as evidenced by a comment thread that, like a sweaty pimple on the ass of a cartoonist working at the drawing table, erupted after The Daily Cartoonist posted a news item a while back on Scott Hilburn’s Argyle Sweater’s syndication. Several shmucks piled on with some petty sniping over sour grapes, including a link to the one oopsie in question. Never mind the obvious fact that the vast, overwhelming number of Argyle Sweaters, the 365 panels a year, year after year stuff, is clearly original material. Even so, Hilburn courageously went out of his way to preempt criticism on his own blog:
Friday, April 27, 2007 - Larson (excerpt)
"I received an e-mail the other day regarding my April 13th comic. The e-mail informed me that the day's panel was overly-similar to a comic already done by Gary Larson. I get a lot of Far Side comparisons so, at first, I thought nothing of it. However, because it mentioned a specific date, I later became bothered by it. I did a little research only to find that he was right - they were more than similar. I e-mailed my editor explaining the situation and asked him what he suggested I do. He replied that this happens quite often. He went on to say that artists often internalize other artists work. I suppose an idea or concept can somehow get lost in one’s subconscious and resurface weeks, months or in this case, years later without realizing that you’ve seen the idea before."
Well now that sounds familiar. Shit happens. And to illustrate that in the spirit of self-confessional full-disclosure, I've been guilty of the same:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/26941/269410d479a2933c2cda09a0fced391250fd1bb5" alt=""
So with the benefit of belated hindsight, there's no way I'd even try foisting this off as original; part of the learning curve in making such amateur mistakes, and it's the job of a professional to recognize and rectify such beginner blunders as best you can. And so apologies to my personal hero that influenced me long before I ever seriously started my own career - B. Kliban (from his classic 1977 book "Whack Your Porcupine"). Over twenty years had passed from when my parents first exposed me to his work and when I stumbled across a mint set of his books at a used bookstore while hiking in Arizona. Imagine my chagrin at flipping through them and discover my own undiscovered dirty laundry. Not the first time the joke's on me...
“There is nothing new in art except talent.” - Anton Chekhov
No comments:
Post a Comment