Robert Crumb—Live Online: The Interview That Didn’t Happen

Are you familiar with Lewis Trondheim?


He has the wackiest question of them all.


From Approximate Continuum Comics ©2001 Lewis Trondheim & Cornélius

He said, “All the famous cartoonists are doing comics and music and sports. What sport do you practice?”

Famous cartoonists do sports?

I know! I had the same reaction, so I wrote him and I said, “No American cartoonist does sports, what are you talking about?”

Yeah, that’s weird. We’re the most unsporty group of people.

Right. So he sent me this list and apparently European cartoonists are all into sports — it’s unbelievable. [Crumb laughs.] He wrote back and he said, “I play squash; Baru, the last Angoulême’s president was a sports teacher at school; Christophe Blain and Boucq are doing body-building; Jean-Yves Ferry, the new scenarist of Astérix is a marathonian; Mezières plays tennis. The young French protégé Bastien Vives is swimming.”


All these European cartoonists are into sports.

Huh. Yeah, I think cartoonists here in France are more well-adjusted people than they are in America. [Groth laughs.] I don’t do any sports. I do zero sports.

Zero. [Crumb laughs.] Never have.

No. I do take a walk once in a while. [Laughs.] Not really a sport.

Well, that’s probably why your knees still work.

[Laughs.] I hate sports, actually.

You don’t watch sports, right?

No. The only interest I have in sports is Serena Williams. [Laughs.]

Well, you’re probably not that interested in her sport.

Tennis shmennis, I could care less about her tennis technique.

[Laughs.] Right, right. [Crumb laughs.]

I wrote him back and said, “That’s a weird fucking question,” and so he wrote another one.

He asked, “Do you know that if you hadn’t drawn all these little hatchings always and everywhere on your panels you’d certainly have had time to draw 50 more books?”

That’s absolutely right. [Groth laughs.] I regret that I didn’t start doing Genesis with the brush. It would’ve taken me half as long.


I thought of it before I started, just using the brush, but then once I started with the pen I couldn’t very well change in the middle.

So why did you choose the pen over the brush in the first place?

It’s habit.

I remember talking to you when you were first learning to use the brush and you said it was difficult but mastering it was incredibly satisfying.

Yeah. Comic books lend themselves very well to the brush.

But when you say habit, you’ve used the brush, so you were in that habit as well, right?

Well, I kind of gave it up. I stopped using it sometime in the early ’90s, late ’80s. I just went back to the pen out of habit. The pen was my first instrument, it’s like a language, you know. The pen was my first language; the brush was like a second language. It’s funny, because I was getting really proficient with the brush when I went back to the pen. And also I think, like for doing Mr. Natural and that type of stuff, I didn’t think the brush was appropriate, the brush was more for illustrational stuff.

Your blues biographies were all brushwork.

Yeah, the Jelly Roll Morton thing, and Charlie Patton and all that. For getting the noir effect, the brush is really great.

“Patton” Zap #11 (1984)

It seemed perfectly appropriate. Do you think the drawing in Genesis would’ve been as good if you used a brush?

Maybe better, who knows? One thing I know, it would've got done a lot sooner if I'd used the brush.

Arnold Roth asks, “Did Harvey Kurtzman ever request that you redo or alter any of your original work? If yes, what happened?”

Hmm. Kurtzman, when I was working for Help, he gave me lots of suggestions but it wasn’t about the drawing so much, except for that criticism of what happened to my drawing after I started taking drugs. He never made any detailed suggestions about the drawing. He would tell me, like when I did that Bulgaria strip, “Go for the jokes more. Think like you’re writing for the guys on the corner.” [Groth laughs.] Very sage advice.

Must’ve been a bit hard to do with your grim drawings of Bulgaria.

Well also, I didn’t really have any guys on the corner in my mind, I didn’t hang out on the corner with the guys when I was a kid, when I was young. [Laughter.]

But you have to think of that kind of entertaining communication to people when your doing cartoons. You always have to keep it entertaining; you can’t expect them to come to you. I don’t like that when I see people do arty stuff and they expect the audience to bend over backwards to understand what it is they’re doing. That doesn't work. You can be deep: you don’t have to talk down to people. But you gotta communicate, you gotta keep them interested.

“Bulgaria: A Sketchbook Report” Help #25 (July 1965)

Well, you were never particularly interested in doing that, were you?

In doing what?

In keeping people interested.

Hell fuck yeah! What, are you kidding?

I always thought you were more interested in expressing yourself.

I was interested in both — of course you gotta keep people interested. You can’t presume they’re going to read it if you don’t put out something toward them. You gotta entertain them, you gotta reach them. A lot of the challenge of any kind of medium where you want to really reach people is to figure out how to do that and still keep it honest, and not just pander — so much media is just pandering. That's the whole problem with most cartooning and most movies, most everything, pop music. The movie industry is particularly bad that way, because there’s so much money involved in making any film, or an HBO program or anything. The people with the money worry that if they don’t pander they’re not going to get the audience, so they just turn every idea to shit. [Groth laughs.] Because in the process of trying to simplify it, dumb it down or whatever, they’re just so worried that if it’s too subtle, it’s not going to reach people. They just kill every good idea. Most movies are just good ideas turned to shit. [Laughter.] Even good movies.

My theory of Hollywood is that the people who produce the movies are actually producing what they themselves love. So they’re actually not pandering.

Well there’s that too. The people with the money have such bad taste themselves. This is what Terry Zwigoff says, that it’s shocking what bad ideas they have. [Laughs.]

I think we’ve reached the stage where people don’t have to pander — they’re self-pandering.

[Laughs.] Yeah, but even when they think they’re doing something good and high-minded, once it’s dragged through the machinery, the processes just turn it to crap. [Laughter.]

I assume you don’t watch a lot of contemporary movies.

Not a lot, no. Not a lot. Occasionally: not much.

I find myself watching more and more old movies. Silent movies…

Oh yeah, I’ve been watching a lot of silent movies lately too, actually, because Pete Poplaski’s here, and he’s a real connoisseur of silent movies, so he’s turned me on to some great silent movies. Great ones.

You know, 80 percent of all silent movies made have all been destroyed.

Lost?: 80 percent, really? That much?

Yes, yes.

Wow. Whew! That’s staggering. There’s a lot of bad ones too. Pete tells me there were companies that specialized in churning out just really second-rate crap. There’s gotta be hundreds of bad silent movies. But the small companies that made inferior stuff are probably mostly what’s lost.

Well, that would be reassuring.

Because, you know, they didn’t make a lot of prints, and nobody cared to keep them. When the company went out of business they just threw everything away.

But God knows how many decent or even good movies were lost.

We don’t even know whether they were good or not.

Well, speaking of shitty movies: let me move on to three questions Bill Griffith has for you. These are real ringers. The first is [laughs] — obviously I don’t have enough tape for this, but — “What do you detest most about the modern world?” [Crumb laughs.] I’ll just sit back for about 20 minutes.

Detest most about the modern world?


Well, as compared to in the past when you had brutality and cruelty and everything, and we still have, so what’s specifically detestable about the modern world that’s different from times past is that now they’ve developed such a very clever way of perception management and persuasion and deception, that this has become huge and elaborate. Millions of people earn their livelihoods involved in this massive deception and trickery, and the selling of stuff and ideas — they've become so good at it. That’s really detestable and despicable, and to stay alert to that is a full-time job. [Laughs.] You’re constantly bombarded with this sales pitch — constantly. That, to me, is really hateful. And it’s the kind of banality of evil type of thing, most of the people doing that for a living have no idea that they’re involved in something that might be harmful or evil.

[Laughs.] You just compared marketing people with Nazis.

Well, yeah.

[Laughs.] What’s my point?

The public relations industry: the stuff that they push, and it’s so amoral. It’s a kind of fascism of a new kind that people don’t recognize as fascism because they just think of guys in military uniforms goose-stepping and dragging innocent people off to concentration camps. It’s not like that, but all the secrecy and stuff just creates a web of paranoia so that we’re all constantly trying to figure out what the conspiracy is. It just creates a horrible paranoia through the whole society. I just read an article in the New Yorker, I think it was, about the National Security Agency.

Oh, yeah.

I was just shocked. I was shocked. It’s just the number of people that work in that agency, and they have this five-thousand-acre “campus” that’s somewhere outside of Washington. There’s thousands of people working in this thing. The article said something like two million people in the United States have clearance for classified information in documents. [Laughs.] Two million. [Laughs.] That offsets the two million that are in jail all the time. [Laughter.]

They’re the ones putting them in jail. Well, they’re all working on behalf of our safety.

That’s the argument, yeah. Keeping us secure from terrorists and shit. And when you start to examine that, it’s such a horrendous load of crap, that’s just scary. Sometimes you think, “Jesus, I know too much, they’re going to get me.” By speaking on the telephone to you, they’re picking up this conversation, they’re gonna, you know… [Laughs.]

You’re living in France now and you’ve lived there for 20 years; do you think the social and cultural marketing apparatus is different there than in the U.S.?

Yeah, it is. It’s less corporate-controlled here. Partly it’s because the old ways are so deeply ingrained here, and the French people are very proud of their old ways and they resist total corporatization of their culture, but it’s happening. It’s really different from when I first came. I was really amazed when I first came here how old-fashioned things were, but that’s changing, people are more Americanized. They’re bigger, they’re fatter, they dress more slovenly like Americans [laughter]; they eat more snack foods. When I first came here, French people did not snack. There were no snack foods in the market. [Laughs.] Now, of course, they have shelves of potato chips and crap like that just like in America. And there’s impulse items at the checkout counter now. There wasn’t when I first came. [Laughs.]

So it’s happening, but more slowly.

Yeah, and just not on the scale, there’s some resistance to it here. Of course you go to some country like the Czech Republic, and it’s sad, they just caved in to that completely when the Soviet Union broke up. It didn’t take the Western corporate financial powers long to move in there and just completely grab that country up. So in beautiful cities, like Prague, there’s a McDonald’s every three blocks. [Laughs.]

Oh, man that’s depressing.

[Laughs.] But here there’s more resistance to that. France has more cultural savvy and more pride. The Czechs were just demoralized people.

But the way you described it, even the French aren’t going to able to resist, ultimately.

Oh boy, it’s a really hard thing to resist, and the average ploucs here, the average person here…

[Laughs.] Ploucs?

Yeah, ploucs. They have very little defense against those things. They're dazzled by it, just like Americans, but there’s enough forces here of resistance against that, there’s a level of intelligent people that fight against this. [Nicolas] Sarkozy is a completely pro-corporate guy: he’s bad news.


FILED UNDER: , , , , , ,

43 Responses to Robert Crumb—Live Online: The Interview That Didn’t Happen

  1. Chance Fiveash says:

    It’s always a pleasure to read an interview with Crumb as interviewed by Groth. Wonderful.

  2. Tom Stein says:

    Truly inspirational thoughts and comments for R. Crumb! It gives me courage to stay on the rightgeous path, despite all adversity that’s out there!

  3. Pingback: Robert Crumb and Gary Groth on almost everything | Robot 6 @ Comic Book Resources – Covering Comic Book News and Entertainment

  4. I’m impressed Crumb is so politically informed. Naomi Klein. Wendell Potter. Food, Inc. The guy could do a Pacifica show and guest blog for digby.

    But we’d rather he’d draw another book.

  5. Ron Wilkinson says:

    Great interview. Lots of parallel experiences in my life. Of course I’m close to his age so that’s a good part of it.
    I appreciate that he put it out there and mixed it into his art and story telling.
    It, his comics, definitely gave me something. They are entertaining and give me a sense of relief- that it is not that bad, this life is not that bad.
    Ha ha!!

  6. Linda says:

    Loved it.

  7. Pingback: Robert Crumb and the Australian interview that didn’t happen The Daily Cartoonist

  8. Uland says:

    I’m sorry, this just comes off as whiny and entitled, as though it’s “manipulation” to print a story containing opinions not shared by Crumb and Groth.As though Crumb believes he should be treated differently than any other artist.

    I mean, Crumb used to own being a sleaze-merchant, and clearly did his best to offend middle-America sensibilites. That Conservatives might be alarmed at their Federal government sponsoring ( paying Crumb, I’m sure) a show of his comic art…Well, yeah.

    And for him to back down— as though he’s above the kind of cultural stew he’s exploited for decades— is just wimpy and lame.

    If any federal grant/funding went to any artists that offended the Cultural-Left’s sensibilities, we’d see the same sort of Huff pieces coming from their side of the fence.

  9. tom clifford says:

    Robert Crumb was a great 60’s countercultural artist and all that, but thinking he’s going to get assassinated by some Mark Chapman type nut is plain ol’ daft. Nobody gives that much of a fuck about him, except a coupla hundred TCJ online readers…

    Let’s face it, all that old blues musician art and Bible interpretation is a boring as batshit. Nobody cares about his later stuff.

    Can someone tell him to start talking lots of drugs again?

  10. Kim Thompson says:

    My rebuttal: (1) No, we wouldn’t. (2) If we did, the lefties would be assholes, it wouldn’t clear the righties of their assholishness.

    To see this as anything other than a political hit (in which Crumb was just collateral damage) pandering to the public, using that child-abuse lady as a blunt instrument, is a little naive.

  11. TimR says:

    “Well, in the case of global warming, OK, I don’t trust the scientific consensus myself, because there’s too many other areas where scientific consensus is also a put-up job. Nothing is on the level is the problem.”

    So true, and such a pleasure to see Crumb saying this. So many people seem to take science, well, as a matter of faith, without any skepticism whatsoever.

    I’m more in the global warming skeptic camp, but I appreciate that he’s at least aware of all the weird politics and machinations behind the popular science blatted out through the news organs.

    “And what money interest is there for the people who believe in global warming, the scientists and all them? What possible money interests — OK, maybe some minor thing, perhaps an alternative energy source is a minor possible way to make money.”

    I have read that there is a potential to make money through the carbon credit trading scheme — that it would be another potential financial bubble for G Sachs and the other vernicious knids to stick their feeding maws into. Al Gore was heavily invested in companies having to do with this. Search for a blog under key words “activist teacher” for more details. Also “rkmdocs.blogspot.com” and scroll to the bottom of his (early in the archive) post about global warming:

    Cap-and-trade has nothing to do with climate. It is part of a scheme to micromanage the allocation of global resources, and to maximize profits from the use of those resources. Think about it. Our ‘powerful factions’ decide who gets the initial free cap-and-trade credits. They run the exchange market itself, and can manipulate the market, create derivative products, sell futures, etc. They can cause deflation or inflation of carbon credits, just as they can cause deflation or inflation of currencies. They decide which corporations get advance insider tips, so they can maximize their emissions while minimizing their offset costs. They decide who gets loans to buy offsets, and at what interest rate. They decide what fraction of petroleum will go to the global North and the global South. They have ‘their man’ in the regulation agencies that certify the validity of offset projects, such as replacing rainforests with tree plantations, thus decreasing carbon sequestration. And they make money every which way as they carry out this micromanagement.

  12. George Bush (not that one) says:

    Dose Crumb and put him in a room with Jodorowsky. Fritz the Metabaron !

  13. Uland says:

    How many films,books,etc., come under fire for promoting values the left doesn’t approve of? Ivan think of plenty. Now imagine they received Federal funding.Do you really think Slate would be cool with Gibsons The Passion getting NEA funds, or ,say soething like Friedkins Cruising?

    I don’t see it.

    Also, I think it’s often difficult to draw a line between “hit piece” and genuine concern.You might think the lady is nuts, but that doesn’t mean she doesn’t believe what shes saying. Crumb is nuts too, of course. It’s his bread and butter. That anyone would be surprised at people thinking his filth is filthy…

    Any state thinking they should send tax money his way seems insane to me.

  14. Greg says:

    Uland – Why are you even here?

  15. Pingback: Carnival of souls: Special “Alternative Comics Mount Rushmore” edition « Attentiondeficitdisorderly by Sean T. Collins

  16. Uland says:

    “And what money interest is there for the people who believe in global warming, the scientists and all them? What possible money interests — OK, maybe some minor thing, perhaps an alternative energy source is a minor possible way to make money.”

    70 billion in the last 15 years in Federal funding alone went to researchers wanting to study APGW. That’s a pretty good reason to “hide the decline”.

  17. Uland says:

    Two uninformed guys blathering. There’s no incentive to promote Global Warming? — Cap and trade, Carbon offset markets (the largest energy companies not having to worry about competition because they can gobble up “carbon credits”), billions in research money, alternative energy scams ( Solyndra). Come on guys.

  18. Artie Romero says:

    Well, you’re the expert.

  19. DiamondDulius says:

    That’s still minor when compared to the oil industry, which is the point, I think… and I don’t believe you can legitimately call a “scam” an incentive…

  20. kim deitch says:

    Tom. Speak for yourself when you say things like that. I find your manner to be totally offensive. Where do you get that stuff anyway? Let’s hear your idea of what’s good.

  21. patrick ford says:

    I notice Fantagraphics is going to reissue Crumb’s “Your Vigor For Life Appalls Me.”

    What are the odds that collection of letters could be brought up to date, at a minimum the letters to TCJ would be wonderful. The Mineshaft letters would be tremendous to collect, but I wouldn’t want to see their back issue sales affected.

    Thanks again for a great interview, and I’m really happy this worked out in print as opposed to having to watch it on video.

  22. Pingback: linky link

  23. Charro says:

    ” Whiny and entitled”, for not liking what this conglomerate controlled, corporate media churns out? Your point of view has no validity in this respect. We have every right to expect the news to address the whole of an issue and not just sensationalism, soundbytes, or propaganda, ‘right or ‘left’.

  24. patrick ford says:

    So I’m coming out of the drug store with a can of almonds and a newspaper, and there is a guy outside talking about how the moon landing was faked.

    Me? I walk on by.

  25. Anthony Thorne says:

    A great, thoughtful interview full of interesting commentary and funny observations from both Groth and Crumb. Lovely stuff.

    “thinking he’s going to get assassinated by some Mark Chapman type nut is plain ol’ daft. Nobody gives that much of a fuck about him, except a coupla hundred TCJ online readers…”

    You sadly overestimate the mentality of angry tabloid readers down here in Australia, who could easily be provoked to lynch Nelson Mandela if they were persuaded that he’d interfered with their daily diet of sport, beer, and letting working-class Aussies receive a ‘fair go’. Rabble-rousing commentary surrounding the exhibition of the Andres Serrano photo ‘Piss Christ’ led to one reader attempting to carry the picture out of the gallery, and two others attacking it with a hammer. I doubt either had heard of Serrano or his photo before the ‘appalled’ newspaper and TV stories got going. Readers of The Daily Telegraph and Herald-Sun would neither have known nor cared about Crumb’s status as an artistic treasure – they would have viewed him as a perverted Yank who blithely drew pictures of pedophilia for jollies, or worse. Add Government funding of left-wing art exhibitions to the mix – taxpayers having their money spent on ‘sick filth’ – and the controversy could quite easily have run for the entire duration of Crumb’s stay, plenty of time for some red-faced lout to try and make his point to Crumb face-to-face. Australia’s most vituperative shock-jock, Alan Jones, commands a huge Sydney audience and was able to start race riots in the streets a few years back. If he’d started up on the subject – and I guess he would have eventually – Crumb’s visit would have been an ugly one. I’m sad that the event was affected, that Crumb pulled out and the conversation between Groth and R.C wasn’t able to occur before an Australian audience, but if we [Australians] are happy to have our public discussion become increasingly shrill and conservative and right-wing, we can’t complain if others not gripped by the same mindset decline to go along for the ride.

    If Crumb’s still drawing covers for book anthologies, one more I’d like to see comes to mind – THE COMPLETE HUP. That said, if ZAP is getting the deluxe hardcover treatment, can someone [Fanta?] gather the complete WEIRDO issues next, whacked-out photo montages, editorials and all?

  26. Great stuff. Too bad the comments section isn’t trollfree though.

  27. Rick Worley says:

    They didn’t say anything disagreeing with Crumb was manipulation, Crumb was saying it was manipulation to send some woman who doesn’t know anything about his work pictures that they know she’ll be offended by out of context and then use quotes by her because they know it will look bad to offend somebody in her position, since she’s supposed to be an advocate for a good cause. And obviously, that is manipulation.

  28. Groth says:

    Thanks to Anthony Thorne for elevating the level of discourse in the Comments section. I was getting worried that my interview was being read mostly by idiots — always a depressing possibility.

    Crumb very explicitly said that he himself wasn’t that worried about physical harm, but that his wife and daughter were, and that he didn’t want to put them through a week of worry. Crumb wanted to go but not enough to put his family through that stress. He put his family’s interests before a public event. What a sick pervert.

  29. TimR says:

    I think I know who you’re directing that at, but for all I know you might be talking about Crumb..?

    Quote: “Well, in the case of global warming, OK, I don’t trust the scientific consensus myself, because there’s too many other areas where scientific consensus is also a put-up job. Nothing is on the level is the problem.”

  30. kim deitch says:

    Well said.

  31. patrick ford says:

    Tim, Your first thought is correct. It absolutely isn’t Crumb I was talking about.

    Substitute “flat Earth” or “Jesus told me in a dream the world will end in seven days” for “fake moon landing” if you like.

    I agree with Crumb’s sceptical view of modern science (particularly where money is an issue). but I think there are some things which are beyond dispute.

  32. patrick ford says:

    As pointed out by Anthony, Crumb very well could have been in danger. Absolutely a possibility. No one said it was a certainty. It is almost certain that had he gone the trip would have been a very bad experience.

  33. TimR says:

    Mainly being rhetorical, I just wasn’t sure you had noticed that Crumb practically endorses the “conspiratorial” view you were mocking.

    I think there are various economic/ideological pressures on *both* sides of the global warming issue, not exclusively on the big oil side.. This whole carbon credit trading regime sounds like a bit more than chump change to me, not to mention the additional control it would offer to ruling class interests over virtually every human activity.

    Another thing that gets me about the global warming issue, as long as we’re on it.. (and as unpleasant and vitriolic as the conversation always seems – not you Pat, I just mean in general) — My intuition (I won’t pretend to be able to speak to the science, I’m annoyed when laypeople make authoritative claims on it as if they could speak to the science of it) is that we would be better served to focus society’s efforts on the pollutants that cause straightforward health problems in the population – very direct cause and effect ill effects, for instance the problems in my part of the country with coal-fired power plants. Clean that stuff up! But the very tenuous claims that are much more arguable (given the *natural* climate shifts that have occurred over the aeons), about global warming, strike me (again as an admitted non-scientist) as much more easily prone to ideological bias infecting the science on all sides.

    (hope this writing isn’t too unpolished.. just my 2 cents here)

  34. patrick ford says:

    A couple of things Crumb said in the interview reminded me immediately of a quote from Jack Kirby.


    “We haven’t come that far since Hitler, and the concentration camps, and the gas chambers, Stalin and Mao, all the people they had killed or sent off to Siberia or whatever. You can go on and on.”

    “Well, as compared to in the past when you had brutality and cruelty and everything, and we still have, so what’s specifically detestable about the modern world that’s different from times past is that now they’ve developed such a very clever way of perception management and persuasion and deception, that this has become huge and elaborate.”


    “We always try to fix our faces. Don’t we look great today? Do we look like the people who built Dachau? No we look as if it never happened. Do we look like the people who committed atrocities in WWII and all the wars before that? No we don’t look like those kinds of people.

    I think we are living in medieval times. It’s only 40 years ago we cooked people in ovens. How sophisticated is that? We can pat ourselves on the back, and say we’re living in a high tech age, but I think we’re still medieval.”

  35. patrick ford says:

    Tim, I really was commenting on avoiding bufoons.

    Let’s just say if I come out of the drug store with a can of cashews and a newspaper, and see a guy dressed in a Batman costume I give him a wide berth.

    As to global warming. Crumb was clear he thought there was a very legitimate concern.

    I think he was more interested in saying people should be sceptical in situations where money plays a role. As he indicated the really big money is interested in disputing the role of man made air pollution.

  36. TimR says:

    You disposed of those almonds pretty quickly. j/k…

    “Crumb was clear he thought there was a very legitimate concern.”

    Not at all! He said he doesn’t trust institutional science one iota, basically, just that if there’s the slightest chance they could be right, it’s too catastrophic to risk it. I suspect that if he read some of the risks of implementing a carbon trading regime, and who the interests are behind doing so, he might weigh the risks


    Quote: “I don’t trust the scientific consensus [on global warming] myself, because there’s too many other areas where scientific consensus is also a put-up job.”

    That you call a view of global warming science as “very legit”?

  37. TimR says:

    … let me edit that.. I agree he thinks the “concern” is legit. Not necessarily the science though.

  38. indig says:

    Love Crumb. Love Groth.

  39. Artie Romero says:

    Good interview, gentlemen. That was a good idea, getting questions from other cartoonists. It is always a pleasure to hear from Groth or Crumb, and the interaction here was especially stimulating. Thank you!

  40. bjenny says:

    Fantastic interview!

  41. julian says:

    Great interview, informative and insightful..R. Crumb’s work has been a touchstone over the decades for many fans, fellow artists, etc– He’s devoted his time and talent to pursuit of his own unique vision of life, warts and all, and the world is a better place for that. ‘Nuff said.

  42. Andrew MacDonald says:

    Thanks for this wonderful interview. I had tickets to see Crumb and travelled interstate to see him. So this makes up for it somewhat. (Am I bitter? Just a tad.)

    Terry Zwigoff, though, is wrong. There wasn’t a hoople head or ageing hippie in sight, just a lot of nice folk who were interested in comics as an art form.

    He can check with Jim Woodring if he doesn’t believe me.

  43. Byron Allen Black says:

    For what it’s worth, Australia’s greatest art critic, the late Robert Hughes, had great praise for Crumb’s work, even calling him ‘the closest we have to a Brueghel’.

Leave a Reply

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