A Cartoonist’s Diary A Cartoonist’s Diary

Brian Ralph: Day 5

Brian Ralph is the cartoonist of the Fall 2011 graphic novel, Daybreak, published by Drawn & Quarterly, and the cult classics Cave-In (Highwater) and the self-published Climbing Out. He is a former contributor to Giant Robot and presently is a Professor of Sequential Art at SCAD.


16 Responses to Brian Ralph: Day 5

  1. Michael Grabowski says:

    Can’t read the comics. :(

  2. DanielJMata says:

    For some reason, you seem to be one of the last people I ever imagined to wear toe shoes….

    Also, more diary comics puh-weeeeze! On your site or wherever!

  3. patrick ford says:

    I had assumed Brian was barefoot, because he came in a Li’l Abner costume.

  4. Ray Davis says:

    Remember, fans, Brian lost his sneakers in “Brian Ralph Day” #4. Continuity points!

  5. Jim Rugg says:

    This diary series is the best!

  6. hcs says:

    no more sdcc diary comics please. they’re all so snobby and “above it all.” the photos here are particularly contemptuous. why bother going at all if you’re just going to dump on everything? is it really such a drag to be invited to major event and have your work publicized, especially for a very minor artist such as the one here? the “too cool for school” attitude here comes off as just a little juvenile and self-important.

    also, isn’t the comics journal supposed to be writing about comics, not presenting comics? isn’t this a breach of journalistic integrity at least to some extent?

  7. Rob Clough says:

    The Comics Journal has been presenting comics for a long, long time. And on this site alone, they’ve been doing Cartoonist Diaries for several months.

  8. hcs says:

    does doing it for a “long, long time” make somehow less incestuous?

  9. Dan Nadel says:

    Give up. There is absolutely no contradiction between writing about comics and publishing them (lift up your head from your screen, look at the one zillion magazines that have been writing about and publishing their subjects for the last 150 years). You don’t want any more SDCC diary comics? Easy. Don’t read them. This one I found hilarious and insightful and dead-on for anyone who’s been there. Get over it.

  10. patrick ford says:

    People who go with three lower case initials as their internet tag seem to have more than one thing in common.

  11. hcs says:

    i would have expected a more formulated response from editorial than “get over it.” how about actually engaging in a discussion as opposed to just dismissing the critique?

  12. hcs says:

    what’s that supposed to mean?

  13. hcs says:

    seriously, can people only leave comments here if they like what they read? isn’t there room for a dissenting voice? does the comics journal only publish commentary on things they approve of? i’m really disappointed in the level of discourse that has arisen from my critique.

  14. Rob Clough says:

    I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’re not a troll. Please don’t make me regret that decision.

    To your points:

    1. This cartoon diary was designed to be funny. Each of the previous four segments was funny. Many of them were self-deprecating. If you read the prior entries, you’ll see that the way Ralph depicts things is far from a drag. As for the photos, I thought they were funny as well. You don’t think it’s funny, which is certainly your right, but that doesn’t mean Ralph’s work is “snobby”. It’s pretty much the opposite of that.

    As far as Ralph being a”minor artist”, well, it can be argued that every cartoonist is “minor”. Brian Ralph has been a big influence on a lot of people as one of the original Fort Thunder cartoonists.

    2. The problem with your “incestuous” comment is that you are assigning TCJ a mission that they themselves have never held. TCJ has reprinted classic comics and commissioned comics (including cartoon interviews) for quite some time. I fail to see how doing so is a “breach of ethics”, unless someone in TCJ did a review of the very comics they had commissioned.

    3. Of course there’s room for a dissenting voice. In fact, TCJ just published your own comments on this site, which disproves one of your complaints. But you are mistaking “room for a dissenting voice” with “I get to publish my comments and no one will argue with me”.

    4. I’m sorry you’re disappointed in the level of discourse. Perhaps if you made your critique a little more coherent, it might be easier to engage. Please explain how printing a comic (a journalistic comic, no less) is a breach of ethics for The Comics Journal.

  15. patrick ford says:

    As Dan pointed out there is nothing unusual about magazines on a particular topic running comics which comment on that topic. A well known example would be Mr. Oswald.

    The New Yorker could be seen in the same way. The New Yorker can be read by people outside it’s target audience, but it’s target audience is over pretty obvious, and it’s cartoons lampoon that target audience.

    What you have with comic books is the typical comic book fan is embarrassed by their hobby. As a result they are sensitive.

  16. ed says:

    I don’t know.

    I know I enjoy reading a Comic-Con cartoon reportage MORE from someone with a definitive p.o.v and critiques it from that angle, enduring the Highs and Low of the thing… rather than having to go through a schlubby mumble-core one with its passive-agressive criticisms.

    Just sayin’.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *