The 100 List | The Reviewers | List Making
Cartoonist Kayfabe
TOM SPURGEON, TCJ EDITOR:
(Editorial from The Comics Journal #210, 1999)
Everyone tells us this is a bad idea. One of the Journal's most respected critics went so far as to write the editors a letter begging us not to try, suggesting that the entire idea of making lists out of art was antithetical to this magazines stated aims and goals. Other complaints have ranged from "it's unnecessary" to "it's completely without value."
We disagree. Comics, more than any other medium, benefits from a broad view. Very few art forms have as polluted a sense of history as comics. When the past is lauded, it is for its contribution to the present-day project or icon rather than for the works themselves. Moreover, the typical way of accessing the art form is through items of complete disposability; the daily newspaper, or the monthly serial comic book. And those are the comics that one can find. Others, including the most-lauded works of the last 30 years, have been accessed and read by less than 10,000 people.
Those within comics are extremely aware of this, a problem in and of itself. The story of this mediums struggle against commercial restraints and the blandness of its generally-held mass audience values is so deeply ingrained within the views of many knowledgeable comics readers that it has changed the way the medium is viewed. Most egregiously, it allows for a sort of critically apologetic dialogue: a comic is great within the context of its depraved origins, not as art itself; even more pointedly, there are not great comics works as much as there are great comics creators struggling against apathy or more insidious tyrannies of the market-place.
This list is a call for an uncompromising re-examination of the comics medium in terms of its best works. It is our hope that in viewing the achievements of the comics art form across a century - from the lurid, pulpy fun of its adventure comics to the well-crafted drama of its serial strips to the startling idiosyncratic delicacy of its high-end artistic triumphs - comics readers will see the medium in a new light. Casual or occasional readers may find a number of comics works worthy of their attention, while more serious readers may re-discover them.
We should note, particularly for first time readers, that the following is, unapologetically this magazine's list. Other serious comics readers no doubt have different ways of looking at the art form - we weren't interested in diluting what we have to offer by seeking a form of consensus that would by definition be political rather than aesthetic (the various comics industries are awash in politics of the most casual, well-meaning kind). Longterm readers will note that the areas of interest in this magazine - classic strips, the modern alternative comic, cartoon-related illustration - are well represented here. This magazine's view of the art form has been developed for more than 20 years, and it's one we believe has an enormous amount of value. We look forward to reading and enjoying other comparable lists, if any are attempted.
The most basic casualty of this approach is that this is a list of English-language comics, our magazine's area of interest, concentration and expertise. While our dedication to international works from Lat to Moebius to Tezuka to Mattotti to Swarte and hundreds of others remains as strong as ever, our critical focus has always been on English-language comics, specifically American comics (And except for those artists published through North American outlets, it can hardly said to be a British list; a more thorough examination of the best comics from the United Kingdom is in the planing stages).
Seth is right, writing in the article on cartoonist's lists that follows, when he says it is too bad that the following is not an international list - but that is a mistake that has more to do with the Journal's critical history than the design of the list. A list that purported to be international in scope that leaned exclusively toward popular, translated-only works would be a bigger distortion than one that excludes them outright. So in that respect, the Journal will follow the lead of similar list makers and stay primarily within our own borders. Similarly, despite the fashion in this decade to embrace a sequential definition of comics, this magazine has always studied panel cartoonists and cartoon-illustrators with a favour equal to comics artists. For that reason, they are included here.
A brief note about our process: The columnists - representing a cross-section of the Journal's writers - were asked to submit Top 100 lists. Those lists, together with those made by the editors, were used to compile a master list - placing a high value on consensus (also when it came to noting which comics were names: short story, series, graphic novel, or a career's output) and level of ranking.The editors took that master list, and after intense period of discussion and debate that included calling upon written sources, professionals and scholars, adjusted it very slightly, resulting in the following list...
...While our contribution to this end-of-century process ends here, yours can begin after its reading. And the larger process, whereby art is consistently and thoroughly examined and re-examined, continues, we hope, for as long as there are works to consider.
See the "TCJ 100 Best Comics of the Century!" list here...
FURTHER READING:
TCJ.com: The Comics Journal #210
Tom Spurgeon at The Comics Reporter
A Moment of Cerebus: The 'Cerebus' Omission
No comments:
Post a Comment