Working With Templates

I've shelved some things to finish my weekly quota of cartoons (as I said, I'm drawing for only a few publications now), so I can now concentrate on rattling off some pages of work.

Personally, I find making a template helps, as does drawing close to same-size; which also makes scanning the drawing into Photoshop on a conventional scanner much easier.

So here's my template, it's on an A4 size (about 11"x8") page, it's 6-panels, and after drawing it with a black pen I scanned it into the computer and changed the line colour to non-photo blue.
Once the template is printed onto the sheets of paper I'm using (high cotton-rag, linen, paper), I can draw on it in a range of formats that fit within the overall rectangle. Because the drawings are quite small I'm using a Koh-I-Noor (Rotring) pen and a Pental brush pen, for the larger panels. After the drawing is on the computer, I fix the 'levels' (the brightness and contrast) which darkens my lines to a solid black, brightens the background to bright white, and makes the blue lines disappear.


Having a planned overall structure such as the maximum 6-panel page helps me plan further ahead, and working to around 9"x 7" allows me to work much more quickly.
Another time saving area for me, in particular, is the text. I'm perfectly happy to use a font and I have no time for any crap about the aesthetics behind it. I've dealt with indy publishers who would rather publish mediocre work that doesn't sell because it has hand-written text, than the most wonderfully written work that couldn't fail to sell, because it uses a font. I'm pleased to say that in at least one case the company went bust, because it was one of the most idiotic business ideas I have ever heard.

London 2012 and the Waffen SS logo

What an absolute disgrace that piece of shit, clunky, SS-like, logo for London 2012 is. I mean, it fails on so many levels it is difficult to know where to begin. Some people have commented on the logo's likeness to some bad 1980s fonts and even it's similarity to some MySpace site designs, but I think it bears startling similarities to a much older design:

Okay, I don't know about you but connotations of the Waffen SS in any signs and symbols makes me distinctly uneasy. You would think, wouldn't you, that the London Mayor, Ken Livingston,given his history, would certainly want to steer clear of that sort of thing.


On the other hand, I hear you say, things are looking up if one can pick up £400,000 - that's right, about $800,000 - for designing a clunky font. Don't know about you, but I'm off to brush up on my Fontographer skills right now.

Can't Draw, Won't Draw

I haven't exactly given up drawing gag cartoons, but I've phased it out for all but a very few markets, about 6 worldwide (I feel I should add here that they are the most prestigious publications in the world, and that I feel they are the only publications left that care about cartoon art and treat cartoonists well).

I'm not finishing the cartoons I draw either, unless specifically asked to do so; I'm submitting pencils only, which they can work with (this is probably why these are prestigious markets, they still care enough about the cartoons they publish to ask for redraws and tweaks and they still use the original art - it may sound old fashioned, but I like working that way).

I'm cutting down on the work because I believe gag cartooning is a trade/craft that is all but dead, here in Britain at any rate. The British market for gag cartoons once included Punch, Private Eye, The Spectator, The New Statesman, almost all the broadsheets, all the tabloids, and almost all the regional press, along with Weekend, Reveille, Titbits, Chat, Woman's World, a range of Trade Journals and special publications like The Weekend Book of Jokes and The Daily Mail Motorshow Review. These days only one tabloid, The Sun, publishes gag cartoons, and Private Eye, The Oldie and The Specatotor are like an old-boys club whose cartoon content would surely come under scrutiny for its nepotistic links by Private Eye, if it wasn't part of that group. The Weekly News pays very, very, weakly, so much so that to sell to that Thomson-owned rag is almost an admission of defeat and they invariably attract only the cartoons that have been refused by every other publication on a cartoonist's list of targets. The new boy, Prospect, bravely tries to fly the flag on behalf of freelance cartoonists everywhere, it simply doesn't pay well enough for the 'New Yorker style gags' it wants (an increased payment of about 700% is needed).

Single panel cartoons by many of Private Eye's piss-poor cartoonists appear in publications like The Telegraph and The Times and The Independent, one presumes because they think, wrongly as it happens, that these cartoonists are the best around (or because maybe the hirers and firers partake of the odd Eye-Lunch), for whatever reason, we are left with newspapers that run graphic panels that are sort of faux-editorial cartoons that are neither funny nor clever, and have probably aided the demise of the craft of cartooning in the UK.

As you all know, comic strips have never been a big deal in the UK, and our home-grown strips are really very amateurish, none more so than the appalling comic strip in The Independent that is drawn by the Editor's wife (wives, friends, Prep-school chums, TV producers, et al, have all done quite well over the years, from some publications, as a result of their cartooning sideline) or The Guardian's Claire in the Community, a comic strip that is now performed on radio - where one at least doesn't have to look at the artless drawings.

I don't know about you, but I have even noticed a reduction in the number of cartoons published by some of my favoured publications. One of the high-paying publications published only 3 cartoons in a recent issue, and there is an equally small amount in this month's issue of another, usual, gag cartoon championing publication. Adding this possible decline to the shrinking space afforded to comic strips in the home of that art, the US, and the rapid loss of Editorial cartoonists in that country, I think the demise of the 3 or 4 panel daily strip cannot be too far away, and that shortly, comic strips will follow gag cartoons into history.

This has been the fag-end of a golden age for cartoonists that started one hundred years ago, and has been a steady down-hill decline, by degree, since the 1980s. Those days were reasonably good even in Britain, where those with talent have often been overshadowed by those with contacts - but that is the same here in any field, and has always been the case.

I look forward to the Manga revolution, and the rise of the graphic novel because having a trust-fund and being able to afford the time to write (it has always been the chosen profession of the well-to-do), or simply having been to Oxbridge or East Anglia will not enable those people to produce this new, popular, literature. This one, I'm afraid, involves a modicum of real talent. The Jaspers and Tristans cannot draw, and no amount of circle-jerk reviews by their old class-mates who have become critics will make their graphic-less attempts popular.

Vive La Revolution.

Trondtastic, Trondgasmic, Trondalicious...

Lewis Trondheim.com

Oh come on, I was a DJ for years, we murdered words all the time to appear cool. Anyway, those portmanteaux monstrosities simply illustrate the fact that I am lost for words. I mean, just look at the drawing above, that provides a gateway to Trondheim's world for Gawd's Sake. Anyway, I was just over at Dirk Deppey's place and he has a link to The Comic Journal's excerpt from this issue's interview with Lewis Trondheim and it is superb (see, what does superb tell you?). I urge you to get the issue for the cover alone never mind the interview, but don't take my word for it, go read it and then to visit his site. I mean now!

Secondly:

Again, from my visit to DD'S Journalista blog, I read that Kevin Melrose has posted the Harvey nominations on Newsarama. I have to say it has me in a complete tizzy. I won't spoil it for you by listing the nominees here, but, the Best Artist and Best Cartoonist categories are too tough for me to even guess at the possible winners. I mean, in the Best Artist category, I really like both Renee French and Brian Fies as cartoonists and as human beings, and I wouldn't want to have to judge, and then just to make it even more appallingly difficult for me, they have my countryman Frank Quitely to compete against. Oh woe. However, with that competition, whoever wins it will know for sure that they are a real artist, and just to be named in that line-up is enough - don't you think?

Best Cartoonist is equally insanely tough, and I must confess to being a huge fan of Jaime Hernandez, Kevin Huizenga and Dan Piraro, who are amongst the nominees. Again, I wouldn't like to say whom I like most, and I'd be happy if any one of these three wins, but I would maybe give it to...nah, that's entirely subjective, let's just wait and see what develops.

By the way, Blogger's spell check doesn't know what portmaneux is, so I outsmarted it, haw!

Death Note 2, The Last Name, hard-subbed by Mishicorp/Sars

Right, that reminds me that I should have started the IManga blog long before now and my Death Note review of the Manga, live-action movies and anime, should be on one long, full, flowing, page. I promise I will get round to it.

This is news though. After one serious hiatus Mishicorp and Sars have finally hard-subbed Death Note 2, The Last Name, as beautifully and lovingly as they did Death Note 1. I won't link to it as obviously I would rather you bought the DVD, of course, but I thought that all you Death Note fans should know it is now out there, in the wild.

Ranter Rod subdued by Serene Susan

Well, the article below, which triggered my Guardian -inspired rage aimed at that paper's habit of running lofty articles on cartoonists and cartooning was actually written by Susan Tomaselli for 3: AM Magazine, which is a must-read (their slogan is 'whatever it is, we're against it' which could almost be my mantra)- go now! That it was on Guardian Online was enough, of course, for the random ranter to strike.

To be fair (now that the legend The Guardian is removed from my eye line), Susan's argument has merit and I have heard my cartooning chum Patricia Storms, a book lover herself as her blog illustrates, pose the same questions. I have considered that the reason GNs deal with more serious subjects and autobiography, more than with humour, is perhaps in a desperate attempt to quickly gain credibility as the art form gains such speedy acceptability; but I suspect it has more to do with what the publishers want, and so it they who are insecure about the relative merits of the genre, not the cartoonists.

The Guardian Online thinks cartoonists belong in their place

I posted this reply on the Gruniads forum, but it may vanish, on account of it being too long, or something. Here's the article:

Are Comic Books Neglecting Comedy?


Oh dear, we Court Jesters have overstepped our mark. We are daring to be more than funny. Ho-Hum.

The odd thing is the Gruniad has acted as a forum for very few cartoonists over the last couple of decades, but it has championed Posey Simmonds work. Now I like Posey and her tales of comfortable middle class life in rural England, but I'd never accuse her of being funny - she left that behind when she dropped 'Bear' and headed into Gemma Bovery country. So whilst the paper runs 'serious' cartoon work, it doesn't really approve of the 'fashion'?

I see you mention Peter Bagge, Tony Millionaire and Johnny Ryan as funsters, well, they are all very different cartoonists, and I take it you are referring to Peter's Buddy Bradley comics about drug-taking and suicide (I think Stinky meant to kill himself) and the like (which I find hilarious - I'm a huge fan) and not his online strip for Reason; which may be a little too serious for your liking? It may also surprise you to know that Johhny Ryan has tackled (haw) the serious subject of testicular cancer, in a funny about Harvey Pekar, which Harvey might not have enjoyed and Tony, well, Tony Millionaire's Maakies have made their way onto Adult Swim (coming to the UK soon I hope) but the strip didn't make it to The Guardian did it? Maybe the Guardian could run the strip instead of the incredibly unfunny IF? It's also worth baring in mind that Millionaire is a very serious children's author and his Sock Monkey series and his latest kiddy book Billy Hazelnuts are always very well recieved. Whilst the three Fantagraphics cartoonists you have chosen might be 'funny' you'd be wrong to think they aren't serious cartoonists.

As for Mom's Cancer, it went from online comic to indy paper (again, not into The Guardian) to book deal, and it was long journey that Brian's Mother was actively involved in. None of his fellow cartoonists begrudge his success and I can assure you he has made it perfectly clear that he would give up any fame, or money, Mom's Cancer has afforded him just to have 10 more minutes with the subject of his excellent book. What would you have had him do, create a fictional 'funny' story for you to enjoy?

No wonder our best cartoonists and comic writers send their work overseas where it is taken seriously. Can you imagine this discussion taking place in Japan, or France, or Italy, or the US? You know, I think the problem is that over here, in the UK, cartooning is a third rate job done as a hobby by people with little or no training or education, whereas in those other countries the cartoonists choose to leave university, art school, cartooning school even, or in some cases a career in Law (Stephan Pastis who draws the syndicated strip Pearls before Swine was a lawyer) to take up what is regarded in their countries as a profession.

Alternatively, writing 'serious' fiction in the UK is usually a job for the Oxbridge elite who use their trust funds to fund the writing that they submit to their classmates who have moved into publishing. The results are then sent to the other Tristans and Jaspers who 'work' as literary critics, and the circle-jerk continues for another generation. I can see, in this scenario, how scared they might be that an actual talent, like being able to draw, might be needed to sell a manuscript someday.

I have made my feelings about this paper's approach to cartooning abundantly clear, The Guardian would much rather print a five-page article lauding a work by a cartoonist than actually run any strips or stories that are relevent or new, so this attitude doesn't really surprise me. You better suck it up though, graphic novels about 'serious' subjects, indeed about any subject, are growing in popularity and look like being the 'in-thing' for some time to come.

The Pat Boyette

Firstly, let me thank Steven and WD for swinging by and giving some valuable thoughts to the Ditko/Boyette.

Of course a simple mistake was always the most likely scenario. Although back then, in the 1970s I hadn't started working in comics and there was no internet so finding facts about the US-based comic scene was pretty remote. However, through my contacts with some magazines where I was already selling gag cartoons and hoping to sell short stories, I knew some publications had a list of female names that male writers could choose an identity from for writing fiction - so back then the possibility that Pat Boyette was a pseudonym for a lot of artists was possible.

However, I thought this would be a good exercise for both Ditko fans and those Pat Boyette fans who feel that he is vastly under rated, and a good few souls on The Comics Journal forum threw up the usual high level of expertise on the man himself, my thanks go out to Russ Maheras, Mike Hunter, Alex Buchet, John Hanley, J Romberger, Tom Spurgeon, Craig Yoe, John Hanley, Matthew Wave, and Christopher Meeks (this could be the brilliant writer of The Middle Aged Man and the Sea).

Also, let me tip my hat to Grant Miehm, Lee Nordling and Arnold Wagner for additional Boyette stuff.

I think between us we scouted out some great links, you should go to TCJ and check 'em out:

Boyette Bio

What's in a name? Let your inner-Otaku speak.

I have always been in awe of people who work, in any field, in anonimity. In the Art world it's pretty rare, unless of course it's a selling point, like Banksy being a real 'underground' tagger (oh yeah).

But there are practical occassions when cartoonists have done this, in the past in particular, for instance when one worked for one of the big two comics publishers here in the UK, one may well have been 'discouraged' from working for the rival publisher. The same was true of DC and Marvel at one point, I'm sure. Which brings me to my first question, 'when is Pat Boyette art, not Pat Boyette work'?

Seems like an odd query, I know, but when Steve Ditko left Charlton comics, Pat Boyette took over some of his stuff (there's a pair of drawing boots to fill), I am now informed. Now, I have a particular comic here that I have puzzled over for years, it's Ghostly Tales #43. I'm totally sure that the first story, where the art is credited to Pat Boyette, is in fact by the great Steve Ditko, it positively reeks of Spider Man and Doctor Strange and just too many Ditko touches for it to be a ghost work - I think.

However, just to be contencious, I'm contrasting it with an uncredited Ditko page, again from Charlton, this time from The Many Ghosts of Doctor Graves; and just for good measure, with another story where the artwork is credited to Pat Boyette. Now, for years I have just assumed that for contractual reasons a bunch of artists worked for Charlton on the fly, and used the psudonym, Pat Boyette, but I read on another site that Pat Boyette was real and worked for Charlton, so I'm confused and bewildered, so I'm throwing it open to you, here is the artwork for you to subject to close-reading and content analysis (you may begin, now:>):

I'm sure this is Ditko because nobody could ghost him this well, and surely nobody ghosting him would go so far as to include Ditko's almost trademark patterning in the work:


I mean, this uncredited page from The Many Ghosts of Doctor Graves is clearly by Ditko and not a ghost artist, precisely because of such detail:

And whilst this form of crosshatching might easily be used by many cartoonists, it adds to the feel of the work and the weight of line and the characterization that a comics fan; a geek, if you wish, can easily recognise.

So now we turn to the second work in Ghostly Tales #43 that is credited to Pat Boyette, and we can see that whilst it is really good art, with it's own style (I know people who prefer it to the Ditko style), it is clearly not drawn by the same hand as the earlier story:

Again, let me be clear, I really like the artwork on the second story, but which of these, if any, is drawn by Pat Boyette?

_________________________________________________

While we are all here talking about Ditko, I thought I'd show you this; it's a fantastic example of the man's pencil and artwork from one of my favourites, The Creeper (which I purloined from Dial B for Blog, a great site):

Free Gilbert and George Digital Print!

You know, I've always loved Alan Yentob's interviewing technique. I think I first became aware of his work, consciously, when he interviewed David Bowie in Cracked Actor. He has way of allowing his interviewees to relax and reveal things that just doesn't happen with anyone else and his interview with Gilbert and George was equally brilliant. I mean, AY has managed to talk the Georgebert's into producing a major work, a digital print, and make it available on the web, for gawd's sake.

Anyway, here's the skinny: If you go to the BBC's site here, up until 11.35pm on 10th May 2007, you can download a set of 9 hi-res jpegs in a zip file, 25megs, that print out as 9 A4 size (11x8) pieces and which come together to form a piece called Planned, by Gilbert and George. Here's how the finished article looks.
In addition, on the site, you'll find a video of Georgebert knocking the piece together on the computer and his wizardry is a wonder to behold.

Todd Goldman, Art Thief.

You know, earlier this month we gave Todd (Cloneman) Goldman the benefit of the doubt when he at least partly 'manned-up' to pilfering David Kelly's Purple Pussey cartoon. However, as more and more Cloneman designs are seen to be nothing more than the product of a fertile copying technique, he has set his litigious friends to work stifling free speech and debate on the Internet. This is of course doomed to fail, but the firm of Sue, Grabbit and Run are making a fist of it. I suppose my attempt to trademark a tee with 'Stolen by Todd Cloneman' on it is doomed to fail, then?

You'll find more details and a link on Dirk Deppey's fine Journalista blog.

On not being Angus McKie, Cam Kennedy, Eddie Campbell, Brian Bolland, Alan Grant, etc,etc.

I don't know when it happened, but at some stage I gave up trying to draw the comics I enjoyed reading and went for the quick thrill of drawing funny comic strip characters.

The result is that drawing in a more 'realistic' (it's a drawing, just lines on paper so that's not a great description, but you get my drift) style is more difficult for me. That's not to say it is somehow easier for the guys mentioned above (British cartoonists), it's just that they make it look easier, or at least more natural. For me, my drawings are a bit contrived at the moment, possibly through decades of trying to make my cartoons look flat, but they will eventually loosen up and whilst I might never become as good as those mentioned, I will eventually be happy, or happier with what I can produce.

Anyway, the latest pages of Johnny Morte have been redrawn and I'm likely to put about ten of these on online, as soon as I letter them. They will replace the pages that are already there.

I haven't changed the story much, but the drawings are more angular and I think a little sharper looking - I won't be able to tell until I see them online.

Todd Goldman bites the bullet

Well, at any rate he has fessed-up to purloining the Purple Pussy, to a point, but not to the other obvious rip-offs:

:FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

POST POP-ARTIST, TODD GOLDMAN, CONTROVERSIAL PAINTING CLEARWATER, FL, April 11, 2007-

Popular post pop-artist, Todd Goldman who has made a career of making fun of the world with his sarcastic commentary and cartoon icons, has mistakenly used the design of an another artist in two of his recent paintings. Todd’s painting, “Dear God, Please Make Everyone Die”, was inspired from a drawing he received unbeknownst to him belonging to an underground web comic artist David “Shmorky” Kelly.


In addition to painting, Todd designs t-shirts for his clothing company, David & Goliath. Todd and his design team create and receive thousands of design ideas every month. It’s no secret that Goldman creates a lot of his painting ideas from his t-shirt designs. Goldman says “I made a judgment error and didn’t research the background of this particular submission. “My intention was not to copy Mr. Kelly. I have never seen his work before and would never intentionally knock-off someone else’s idea.”
Goldman has issued a formal apology to Mr. Kelly and has stated that he will not be using his design again in the future. As a gesture of good faith, Goldman has pledged not (to) profit from his mistake. He will instead donate his proceeds from the painting directly to Mr. Kelly or his charity of choice.


Yeah well, paying up is really the least he can do. Note the language in the last paragraph, 'not profiting' from this 'mistake' is key, and it is an attempt to make some wriggle-room in order to avoid accusations of fraud. Well, you know what, when an 'artist' with a reputation like Todd Golman's uses someone else's work for his portfolio and gains more acclaim from that usage, he profits indirectly from it, so he's really going to find it hard to wriggle out of that one. I reckon paying up big is the only way forward.

As for the numpty (good old Scottish word) who suggested on a forum that this is legitimate use and it's like Andy Warhol using a Disney image, er, no it's not. The one in the position of unequal power in this relationship is the (Lord knows why) 'acclaimed artist' known as Todd Goldman, who has ripped-off a 'lowly' web comic artist. Not cool, not classy, not professional, not ethical, simply not done.

Check out these links:

Mike Tyndall

New Las Vegas Sun article

So it Goes...Tiddely Pom.

Kurt Vonnegut, that often dark and heavily satirical veteran of the US counterculture, the brilliant author of Slaughterhouse-Five, died yesterday, aged 84. Go read at least one of his books.

Why create, when others can do it for you?

What's the difference between cartoonist David Kelly, and 'world-renowned artist' Todd Goldman'?

(Let me be honest, I'm not really a fan of David Kelly's cartoons, they are not my style, but they look more impressive artworks to me, than the stuff that Goldman produces - except when...well, read on...)

You don't know the answer, then maybe this will will enlighten you - this drawing is from Kelly's Purple Pussy, from his archive, from 2001:

And this is from a much more recent gallery collection by 'world-renowned' artist Todd Goldman:


I think I can spot one or two similarities. Of course the major difference is that 'world-renowned' artist Todd Golman gets a tasty six-figure sum for his, er, originals!

The following sites cover the story in more detail, and one or two even pick up on the apparent likeness of Goldman's Eve L to Roman Dirge's Lenore character. * A quick addittion: both my daughters are fans of Lenore and have some comics and stuff - Roman Dirge mentions the offender on his blog:

Dirk Deppey's Journalista

Juxtapoz

Something Awful

You Thought We Wouldn't Notice

Digg.com

Metafilter

Comicbook Resources

Scott Kurtz

Fleen.com

Something Positive

A non-cartoon related note: Edinburgh's Council Tax (a nice little earner)

This is the document (click for larger picture) that shows that my Council Tax bill has been too high since I moved here. It has now been lowered from band G to band F, backdated to the year 2000. Prior to this, I have now discovered that my old my flat was also incorrectly banded at band G, the same band as several Georgian houses in millionaire Heriot Row and the management flat at the Balmoral Hotel, and one band below The Edinburgh Club on Princes Street - but an obvious mistake, no doubt:>)

Now, I'd have to leave you to make the creative leap for yourself, but consider the following, several of my neighbours are still in the G band, whilst the rest of us (on this small exclusive estate) are now in band F, despite the fact that Edinburgh Council clearly now know that nobody here should be being charged that much. Over at nearby Fettes Rise, one poor punter is in band G, while all their neighbours are in band F, and in nearby Fettes village, a handful of people are blissfully unaware that they are paying more than their neighbours for the same services. This looks even more bizarre as a pattern when 1/2. 1/3, 1/5 and 1/6 are all paying band F, but the poor schlub in 1/4 is paying band G; which also means, by the way, that they are paying more for Water and Sewage than all their neighbours. The Council Tax rates for Ferry Road and Inverleith make for interesting reading too, as they range from A to G, which is one hell of a sweep, and deeply troubling.

Meanwhile, a man who recently bought a flat in Leith, where I was born, had his band reduced from; you guessed it G to F, and seems pretty pleased about that, and also seems blissfully unaware that using the correct criteria for rating Council Tax, how much the house in reasonable repair would have sold for in 1991, that in the early 1992 you couldn't give property in Leith away, so there's no way the flat he's in would have realised that price in 1991. In fact, according to research conducted on behalf of Bank of Scotland by NOP World in 2005, the average first time buyer in Scotland paid £40,918 for a property in 1993, and at that point in time, according to several articles in the Scotsman, Edinburgh ranked below several other Scottish cities in house price inflation.

http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/includes/29-01-05_StampDutyScotland.doc.

Now, is it my imagination, or does the letter 'G' appear frequently in the preceding passages?

HAW, HAW, Satire!

I can't understand why or when cartoonists decided that satire meant simply switching positions, but they did. You know, Price Charles in a room with a plant and the plant complains about him and stuff like that; it's very predictable - unless I do it that is, then it just looks all new and shiny, to me at least. So here is, literally, a satirical quickie.

As soon as I see the clip of the RAF guy on the news advocating that his troops grow beards to get respect in Afghanistan, I jot down a drawing, quickly, with a trusty felt-tip pen:

Now, I'm in a rush so I don't want a lot of palaver and I can't be arsed reaching for the lightbox so I quickly trace the thing on a new sheet of cheapo typing paper using a non-photo blue pencil, but I add a little more detail:

At this stage I would just ink it and scan it into the computer as the scanner can't see the blue lines unless I scan in colour, so no need to erase and risk fading the lines or tearing the paper.

As I said though, I'm in a rush so I scan in and change the drawing to 'gray scale' and darken the lines a little and then, again because I'm rushing, I draw with the mouse in Photoshop and put some basic lines in place - remember this is just a rough.

Now, I click a new 'Layer' and rename it and then I click 'multiply' and I can colour right up to and even under the black lines. My rough is almost ready to send by email:

Just as soon as I 'merge' this bad-boy (the colour layer) with the rest of the drawing. And there we go, took about 10 minutes in total, but the finished drawing will take longer, providing it gets the nod, of course. Meanwhile, I have my blue pencil sketch ready for possible changes, and inking, and suddenly I'm ahead of time, rather than behind.

Geoff Hassing's ideas factory

I was just talking to Geoff Hassing (you'll see some of Geoff's work alongside mine in National Lampoon's, Funniest Cartoons of the 21st Century) who was wondering if we all come up with gag ideas in different ways, and I think it's an interesting topic.

I mentioned the gag you can see below, which I think I can maybe only sell to one of my clients; maybe. Here's how it came about, I was working in the wee small hours writing gags and I had a DVD on in the background (bearing in mind I'd recently watched The Illusionist and The Prestige and had even flicked through an old Luther Arkwright comic) of a Phillip Pullman story called The Ruby in the Smoke; which starred Billie Piper of Doctor Who fame. Now 'Ruby' is a period piece, but with modern pacing - which is quite pleasing, and the other movies are also period pieces, and the comic is a sort of Prussian Empire sci-fi piece, like David Lynch's version of Dune, so I was always going to be influenced, to some degree, in that direction.

The UK cartoonist David Langdon, who himself could be called, albeit affectionately, a period piece - once referred to the process of thinking up cartoon punchlines as 'controlled mind-wandering'. I kind of like that, because you sort of do let your imagination run - but not riot.

You see, you have to target certain markets with your cartoons, that's just a realistic acceptance that this is a business, and whilst you want to be as creative and as funny as you can be, you do have to obey the constraints of the publication you are targeting. So for instance, you might be thinking about office furniture and a torture chamber, this train of thought could have been started by a news article, a line of movie dialogue, a cartoon you saw, a joke you heard, whatever, and you will combine these ideas in search of a gag. But you will limit the ideas you can wring out of this scenario depending on how which market it's going to. For instance, if it's going to the Saturday Evening Post, it'll be tamer than it would be if it were heading for the Wall Street Journal and that cartoon would be tamer, and less wild, than a cartoon heading for, say, Playboy.

Whilst controlling your ideas like this might seem a little restrictive, at first glance, it actually works to your benefit in the long run, because you can go on to develop the idea in stages. So instead of beginning with the most 'out-there' idea, and ending up with only one, perhaps difficult to sell, cartoon, you work your way up slowly, and with any luck create a number of good cartoons, suitable for a variety of markets, as you stretch the idea to its wildest conclusion. I suppose it's a sort of humour by degree.

Anyway, I roughed this cartoon out and it was one of a batch I drew up the following day; but I didn't send it because I didn't think it was that funny. However, Geoff likes it and I think I'm maybe coming round. I do think it'll be a good fit for one of my clients; so in that sense it is not a very good cartoon:

Phew!

Okay, having got over the fact that even people who 'only draw for a living' can long to do something else, I have another tip for those of you who get bored cartooning; change pens.

I was almost single-handedly resposible for the influx of Faber Castell-Pitt brush pens into the UK (see the cartoon fiend blog) Before he died, my chum, the cartoonist Chris Paterson, used to send me the things from Florida because you just couldn't get them over here. Then cartoonist Tim Harries found a place in Walses that sold them and then I managed to find a couple of online sources, so I bought a hundred, and then a hundred more.

You don't need to be eagle-eyed to spot the difference between the cartoons I have drawn for Prospect Magazine over the years, and those I drew for Punch Magazine back in the 1980s. The lines on the newer cartoons are very, very, thick, and the Punch cartoon lines are spidery-thin. Most, if not all, of the Prospect drawings were drawn with a brush pen, but the early stuff was drawn using Indian ink and a dip pen with a Crowquill nib (those things stuck you in the thumb every time).

So, recently, I've been using a nib again and I'm quite liking the drawings I'm producing. Incidentally, like a lot of other people out there I can't see what I've drawn, properly, unless it's reflected back at me. I used a mirror to look at the things years ago, but seeing them on a programme like Photoshop, or on a web page works just as well now. Anyway, I've been drawing things like my comic strip, which has now been in development for about 15 years, with a dip pen using a variety of Manga nibs; Saji-pen, G-pen and Maru-pen, because I really wasn't happy with the way it looked using a brush pen.

I must say it has, metaphorically, put quite a spring in my step and I am already drawing cartoons that have to be over in the US this month, using my nibs. On the strip front, I'm really quite pleased with the way it's looking, and having finally managed to reach a compromise with myself about public/private art, I'm getting to the stage where I can say I'm happy with the whole thing. So much so that I'm even colouring it.

Not Proustian.

I gave up cartooning, about ten or fifteen years ago, and went into academia, principally to brush up on my writing skills - such as they are - but also because I felt a need for something else. In retrospect it was probably something as obvious and fundamental as a need to mix with people who weren't particularly interested in cartooning. No, that's not really true, I'm covering my backside there, but as this is just between us I can be completely honest; what I felt then was that cartooning was both pointless, and not a very sensible job for an adult. I felt I needed to do more, and that I needed to specialize in something to be able to do so. I chose Art and enrolled in what would become a lifelong learning programme.

I've been lucky, though, I think. I've been taught, through the Open University, by people like Tim Benton, Angus Calder, Arthur Marwick, Lizbeth Goodman, and many, many, others, and through them I've met poets like Jack Mapanje and Jackie Kay (who broke my clock), and some of the hardest working students, of all ages, sizes, shapes, and colours. When I went on to university for a second degree I was lucky to be there when Nicholas Royle was teaching English Lit, and Literary Criticism, and when John Burnside was there to sharpen up my challenged penmanship.

So, I suppose you're wondering out loud, what made you go back to cartooning? Well, I'm glad you asked because there are two answers to this; the first is because my son was going to Switzerland on a Rudolf Steiner School exchange and he wanted a new pair of enormous trainers for his size 12 feet, and I got back into it for extra lolly. The other reason is that I was inspired back by some of the brilliant work I discovered online, and in books. I mean, over all those years away I kept up with stuff, I bought Punch and Private Eye and the New Yorker and the like, but I never saw anything new or brilliant in the shrinking world of gag cartooning that lit my fuse. What I did discover and rediscover though was the work of Robert Crumb, and Charles Burns and Peter Bagge and Dan Clowes.

It was this new type of graphic novel, like Ghost World, or even the old type with comic collections like Bagge's Hate, a literate package of words and pictures that brought me back in. You see I'd been drawing and doing a tiny bit of writing but I wanted to do more, so I studied Art History and then I went on to study English Literature and I think that I had progressed so much as a reader, as a consumer of texts, that what I did had become very, very unchallenging to me, very disappointing, and I couldn't see any way to make it better. But here it was, this new thing, this old thing made new, repacked and remade; here was a symbiosis of art and text that was more than comics had so far been, it was, and I felt that with a growing string of letters after my name that I was now in a position to recognise it, literature that blurred the persistent boundary between low and high art. I had found cartooning I liked, that I could try to do, and that I had an understanding of and could put into words what I liked about it and why.

I suppose what I'm getting at is this. Just because you can draw cartoons doesn't mean you should. I drew cartoons as a job, as a way to make money, and it eventually became just what it sounds like, a daily chore, a grind. I didn't go away and have a Proustian or Joycean epiphany or anything like that, I just did what I hadn't done when I was younger; I learned about life and read a few books and introduced myself to more influences and quietly matured. When I finally sat down in front of a sheet of paper again I had grown up. That was something I couldn't do while I was younger.

So, and this is a purely personal list, here are some books you might want to look at if, like I did, you feel your pencil is beginning to droop (I've added some newer ones, of course):

Charles Burns: Skin Deep, Big Baby, Black Hole, et al.

Dan Clowes: Ghost World

Harvey Pekar: American Splendour, etc.

Peter Bagge: Buddy Bradley and Hate, and everything else

Art Speigelman: Maus

Robert Crumb (a safe introduction would be something with Bob and Harv's Comics (Robert Crumb's work on American Splendour) in it. But then everything, if you can get it.

Now obviously you can add Joe Sacco and Marjane Satrapi and Renee French and others to this list but these are the texts that sucked me back in and I'd certainly recommend them if you ever find yourself in the same place I did.