Features

The Jim Rugg Interview

Animation

VALENTI: Your stuff seems very animation-influenced.

RUGG: It is. There are elements I like of animation. I like the drawing of it; I just have a problem with it moving. Like, I do my own animations! I was hanging out with a friend of mine, and we made animated GIFs one night for hours. It’s so much fun to watch the characters running around or something. But watching animation, more complex animation, is very difficult for me. Hanna-Barbara stuff, something like that is easier for me to watch. It might be too much movement (more complex work, not H-B).

VALENTI: Yeah, you definitely have that flat — very Hanna-Barbera. You can almost see the drawings in Hanna-Barbera. I know that they were very low budget, so you could almost separate out the drawings in a way you can’t in slick CGI.

RUGG: I’m not able to pinpoint what it is. I don’t know if it’s a depth issue or what. I can’t really explain it, but I like the ’50s and ’60s. I like a lot of the animation and design from that era. Not to say that Hanna-Barbera is great animation or design, but just stuff of that era. Rocky and Bullwinkle, stuff like that. Part of it is I look at that stuff and think, “I could do that. Just characters moving in front of a background.” There’s always been an element of that, to see something and want to make my own version of it.

VALENTI: What people talk about with ’70s and ’80s comics is how it seems like you could just do that.

RUGG: Right. I think that’s why I hand-letter so much stuff. Because the lettering was the last thing I learned how to do. That was the one thing that separated my work from whatever I was looking to as my example. And that was like the professional mark; it was the last thing I added.

VALENTI: For Afrodisiac, I know in some interviews you were asked questions about race. But were you ever concerned about questions of misogyny?

RUGG: Yeah. Yeah, because I don’t think I can defend that one. There’s no defense when the pimp is a hero in my mind. But if your stance is that the superhero concept is fascist, and offensive for glorifying violence, then I feel that equating that to a pimp makes sense.

VALENTI: There’s a weirdly wholesome tone to Afrodisiac.

RUGG: Well, isn’t there a weirdly wholesome tone to Batman? Or Spider-Man? Name any superviolent superhero character that is aimed at kids. They wrap it in a wholesome tone.

VALENTI: Was that your ’70s and ’80s experience?

RUGG: I don’t think so. I think that at some point I realized, when I was an adult, all that stuff I learned from movies and cartoons, and what adults told me, didn’t correlate to real life. The real world doesn’t correlate to anything I read as a kid as to what adulthood would be like. And I’m kind of angry over that. Like, why wouldn’t you prepare me to be an adult? You know, school or pop culture or anything? What’s the advantage? It’s like we’re educated to be stupid. Comics and the superhero genre I think contribute to that.

VALENTI: We are adults, and we can’t let go of it, a lot of people our age. Is that all we have to draw on? Are those our images?

RUGG: Me personally, I spent no time reading any classics or going to museums when I was a kid. Cartoons and comic books are kind of the iconography that I’m stuck with. That’s the stuff I understand. If I’m going to tell any stories, that’s my vocabulary. Good or bad, whatever. I try not to judge that part.

I hate coming back to Chris Ware and Dan Clowes, but those guys use cartoons as vocabulary and tell amazingly complex and nuanced stories. So I don’t think that’s a limitation in itself. I think if you only focus on the surface style that can be a problem. Like all those people who imitated [Quinten] Tarantino’s pop culture conversations, a lot of them fell short of what he was attempting to do.

 

Afrodisiac ©2009 Jim Rugg and Brian Maruca