I'm not the center of the universe!
So, this is part of the on-going Adams Experiment. I don't have much to say about the strip itself, but I do have something to say about the characters.
This may be the first Basic instructions in which I do not appear. I have been trying for a long time now to establish (perhaps too subtly) that the people in the strip other than my wife and I are not just random people I've thrown in because I like the drawing, but that they are people with lives. This couple has a bad marriage. If you go back in the archives, I think you'll find more evidence that these two shouldn't have gotten married.
This may be the first Basic instructions in which I do not appear. I have been trying for a long time now to establish (perhaps too subtly) that the people in the strip other than my wife and I are not just random people I've thrown in because I like the drawing, but that they are people with lives. This couple has a bad marriage. If you go back in the archives, I think you'll find more evidence that these two shouldn't have gotten married.
posted by Scott Meyer at Friday, September 07, 2007
29 Comments:
I have noticed that the characters are "actual" people - the "boss" for example is the same character (if I remember correctly) in every strip where you have a boss.
The dancing one is funny because it is so true! Actually, that is what makes all of your comics so funny - everyone has either been in these situations or knows someone in these situations.
Do you take suggestions for future strips? One idea occurred to me this morning while I was on a teleconference from home...
:-)
Hmm, I think this is an example of a strip that might have worked better in the full format. Personally, I hate when strips repeat artwork for multiple panels. I do like the character development, though. It reels you in over time. It's why I grew to love Bloom County.
I agree completely with snowdow. While I was reading this comic, I thought it was very funny, but it would have been better in the full format. And the repeated artwork was also very noticeable.
I wish I could see the fourth pane on this one. Being married myself I know the wife had to win, but it leaves me feeling empty somehow.
I agree with the other commenter that this strip would have worked better in the old full format. Scott Adams is probably right that the traditional format is a must have if you want to be syndicated.
But the full format is much more popular with webcomics and I think the full format works better in the web medium. (Which is probably the better place to be right now anyway.)
Good comic today. However, I would have liked a change in the stances of the characters. Having the same (or very similar) image in all three panes is kind of boring.
I really think newspapers will have to change formats since the most exciting new comics are on the web and usually 4 panels.
Scott Adams's advice is really all about becoming a newspaper comic and is valid in that way. And certainly, him pushing you to try different things can only be helping you creatively. Even if you dislike the comics you create under his instructions (and I do), how can it hurt?
Most importantly, I started reading your comic because of Scott Adams. Just in case he feels like the pariah of the Basic Instructions universe, it should be acknowledged that he is certainly helping you.
I must be slow. I was absorbed (as absorbed as you can get about line drawings, anyway) by the situation, which is painfully familiar to me; and didn't notice until I read the comments that the panel was repeated X3. Afterwards, though, it stood out like a hair in a wart. This probably shouldn't happen too many times, or else your credibility might suffer.
I didn't really notice the repeated artwork across panels. When it was pointed out, I didn't really think it took away from the comic.
On the other hand, I'm a big fan of Dinosaur Comics, and they use the same artwork every day, so maybe I've just developed a higher repeated-artwork tolerance.
I'll chime in on the repetition. I think having the same drawing twice can be very funny in itself, and I've enjoyed it when you do that, but I agree with most of the others that having all panels exactly the same just doesn't work as well.
Love your stuff (4-panel and the more recent 3-panel ones)! Your comic is in my rotation of only 4 that I view regularly.
I like it when the strip has humorous suggestions of how to do something. This one doesn't even hint at how to avoid dancing. I was expecting a couple panels on making up good excuses, faking an injury, buying jewelry, etc.
I also noticed the repeated artwork, but it didn't necessarily bother me--I often like when the same artwork is re-used but there's some sort of turnabout in the text.
I love the first panel, but after that it is much weaker than the majority of your work. The other two are not unfunny, they're just not as funny as the first. You punch me in the face with funny and the rest is just ... there.
I also didn't notice the repeated drawing until someone commented, but looking back I realize that I didn't laugh at the drawings, just the writing. If you repeat frames, you miss an opportunity to make the comedy richer (which is important now that you're dropping a frame). I've found some of your art funny in the past, I wouldn't say it hurts you in my eyes to repeat frames, but it doesn't help either.
Hi Scott. It's cool to repeat pictures but three identical frames is stretching it IMO. :)
Another suggestion... don't make the tips of the text balloons nearly touch the character's lips. We know speech comes out of the mouth already :P just pointing the "balloon tail" in the general direction of the character will do.
Cheers!
I don't have a four panel version to compare it to but I think this three panel comic worked well. I can definitely relate to this one!
I had the same experience with the repeat art work as the wart hair commenter. Didn't notice at first, but after it was pointed out found it boring/distracting.
Couldn't you create versions for both media? That would be more work, but it would also increase your marketability.
You might even include a reference to your web page in tiny print. The newspapers might complain, but if you give them different strips than in your web page, you might get away with it.
I like the different characters. I noticed that right away. The more, the merrier I say.
The three panel experiment seems to be working nicely. I'd suggest trying to do 7 comics a week to get an idea of how hard it would be (plus, it would give me something to read the rest of the week!).
Not to harp on the same topic, but... Repeat artwork is a great tool for demonstrating different ways to answer the same question. In this situation, however, there is an ongoing dialogue, and as such should show some different facial expresions.
Frank,
"In this situation, however, there is an ongoing dialogue, and as such should show some different facial expresions. "
You know I'm not so sure: I think the fact that their expressions stay ABSOLUTELY exactly the same adds the humour. It gives it the feeling that none of the words been spoken are actually sincerely felt - that these are two people who are just going through the motions of relating to each other.
I think that's actually a really neat trick and - ta da - one that Scott looks set to make his actual hallmark.
But what would I know: I am limey and we like irony/sarcasm.
:-)
The best strips in print all have a wide range of characters. Having yourself as the star is great, but fleshing out your supporting cast will certainly give you more options over time. And I hope you are doing this for a long time.
I feel like the three-panel format works best when the jokes are delivered through the characters' dialogue, rather than "voiced-over" in the caption.
I'd like to see some three-panel strips where the only caption is the day's how-to, and everything else is pure dialogue - in addition to hopefully being funnier, that would leave room for more lovely character development.
On the repeated-artwork subject - it's a maxim in animation that people never, ever stop moving. In real life, you will not see anyone maintain a pose for the length of a sentence, let alone a conversation. So it's not about repetition being bad, per se - it just feels unnatural, which is the exact opposite of how your words feel.
Also: When you do get syndicated, please keep the same RSS feed! I am lazy and clicking is hard.
The repeated artwork killed it. I liked the line about the ruffled shirt, but was so distracted by the wax figures that it didn't go anywhere.
My biggest problem is that in these 3-panel comics everything feels so cramped. Especially the text.
In your regular 4-panel format, the size of the charactres compared to the size of the text and dialogue makes for an easier read. It also helps that the narrative text is of a more "formal" font than that of the dialogue which has the handwritten "comic" feel to it.
In these Adams strips, however, everything seems to have the same weight and emphasis. And even though I can tell the narrative text is of a dirrerent font than the dialogue they still have very much the same feel.
Having everything in caps also makes it harder for me to read.
Nice comic. Funny. The identical artwork is funny occasionally as it ties in with the "instruction manual" theme. All caps are fine by me.
It seems that with three panels the 'zinger' tends to be dropped. Your four panel strips tend to be two panels of build-up, a zinger, and the punch line.. Most often I prefer the zinger to the punchline.
I was disappointed not to see you in this comic...I've grown accustomed to it. I think using other characters who we get to know would be useful, but I can't remember seeing these two before. If you want to use a variety of characters as your focal points in different strips and maintain the interest in them as real people with actual lives, you may need to use them more regularly. For example, maybe you would use these two once or twice a week if you end up creating a daily (which would be GREAT!).
Also, to echo an earlier comment, Scott Adams introduced me to your strip, and I'm hooked. Regardless of how your work with him progresses, your talent and humor have made a permanent fan of me.
1. I don't mind art repetition if it can be carried by the material. You generally do this well, but your forays into more dynamism between panels has raised the bar so that repetition is both more noticeable and less satisfying. Still, you can get away with it from time to time because of the instruction format.
2. Scott Adams may well help you get into regular syndication in a traditional paper. However, his advice so far has led to strips blanched of funny. I don't know if it's over-thinking, over-tweaking, or over-Adams-ed, but I was enjoying it all much more before I hit the "assignments".
3. Yes, I read all the way from the start of the archive to the current strip.
4. If you're planning on splitting off the strip into a different format with broadened focus and removing "yourself" from some of the strips for development of other characters, maybe you should separate out the syndication-friendly strip from the one that garnered the original fan base? I dunno. I know it's necessary to make compromises like that when trying to be competitive in glutted markets, but it truly feels like the attempts at marketability are hitting false notes so far. Maybe see if another made comic artist can offer you different challenges from those Adams is giving you? Sometimes a different mentor can help you hit the mark without eliminating the voice that made folks tune in, but you probably know that already. I mean, heck, working with Scott Adams - hurrah! Still. Not nearly as funny. At least not yet.
5. Other than all of that, I got a lot of laughs out of your strip and I hope all of this experimentation leads to bigger and better opportunities to get your material out there. It's great to see an artist/comedian working to widen their pool of influence this way.
Add me to the list with the Limey as someone who thinks that the same art made for a good effect. Especially with the wife, in that she seemed to have that smile that says, "if you don't agree with me, I could potentially kill you."
As another reader who was brought in via Scott Adams, I honestly adore this strip. The original 4-panel is my preferred method, but you've had more time to hone that technique. The 3-panel strip is still very good, and given time will probably be just as good as the original, if you decide to keep at it.
And today's "Dr. Bunsen Honeydew" just damn near killed me. The combination of the art and the writing there was a total win, IMO. :-)
Drop the repetitive art. Please! Your strenght is your words, the humor comes from the lines said, not the faces they make, but using the same image over and over and also between different strips makes me think of Chucky the Doll rather than any humourous human being.
Your work is terriic and I'll enjoy it in any format.
As a suggestion, I found the small writing in this 3-panel strip a bit hard on the eyes. (I haven't noticed a similar problem with your regular format.) As people reach middle age they can't read tiny print as easily as before. Also, if there's too much text the panel looks cluttered. White space is a good thing.
You might want to to try to omit every single unnecessary word. That's a challenge because most of the words in this stip are essential. Besides, your choice of words and even your verbosity itself are part of what makes your comic special.
Put each word and phrase "on trial" and see if you can trim a few more words (without losing any substance) so that the strip is easier to read.
By the way, I hope you don't let the volume of suggestions bother you. If other artists were open to it, I'm sure they'd get just as many suggestions. I could certainly suggest about 1000 improvements to Gary Trudeau, starting with his subject matter.
Every work of art can be improved upon. Take what's useful from the suggestions and ignore what you aren't able to use right now. Good luck.
Post a Comment
<< Home