(Before I begin, I would like to note that I had some personal dealings with David Mazzucchelli in my aspiring-cartoonist days. He was very generous with his time and opinions, which I will always appreciate. I hope that if he reads the following, he won’t take the more polemical bits personally. As I think he would agree, ideas are best rendered through oppositions.)
The shock of Asterios Polyp is the degree to which David Mazzucchelli appears to glory in his command of artifice. Mazzucchelli’s previous efforts, for all the shifts in styles and genres over the years, had been exemplars of dramatic naturalism. In Daredevil: Born Again and Batman: Year One, his 1980s collaborations with scriptwriter Frank Miller, the gaudy trappings of the superhero genre—the fanciful costumes and violent spectacle—seem like impositions on the stories. The material comes most to life when it focuses on the mundane dramas of the characters’ lives. Born Again rarely features the hero in costume, and while he’s always central, he becomes just one character among many in the book’s large ensemble cast. In Batman: Year One, the title character was effectively reduced to a supporting role; the true protagonist was the future Police Commissioner Gordon and his efforts to navigate the city’s squalor and corruption. The emphasis on the mundane and continued in Mazzucchelli’s major 1990s efforts, such as the comics adaptation of Paul Auster’s novel City of Glass, and his short pieces in Rubber Blanket, Drawn & Quarterly, and other anthologies. Character drama seemed like it was everything to him, and with his command of character nuance, his ability to set scenes, and his capacity for remarkably observant depictions of story locales, he had a uniquely potent arsenal for realizing any story to which he applied himself.
In Asterios Polyp, Mazzucchelli’s decade-in-the-making graphic novel, he turns his back on virtually everything that defined his previous work. The title character is an academic—an architecture professor—who chucks it all to take up a working-class, small-town existence. The “simple life” (cue the Elton John song) helps him get in touch with his true self and come to terms with his relationship with his ex-wife, with whom he reconciles at the book’s end. The story is glib, trite, and populated with hackneyed characters. There is nothing naturalistic or observed in their depiction; the ones that don’t expound narratives and theses at each other either embody some abstract quality or behave in some contrivedly absurd way, such as speaking in malapropisms or spouting Leninist cant. The drawing often looks like it was processed though a computer, with its ersatz quality only emphasized by the arbitrary color scheme and the emphasis on yellow and purple hues. The book largely seems to exist as a platform to show off effects. Here’s how lettering and balloon shapes can be used to inflect characterizations. Here’s how color and line can be used to render shifts in emotional tone. Here’s how compositional repetitions can be used to illustrate a character’s mindset. And so on. Mazzucchelli has been teaching comics at the School of Visual Arts for several years now, and one wonders to what extent Asterios Polyp was intended as a textbook in his classes. As for me, I spent my first reading hating the book from one end of its piss-elegant jacket design to the other.
However, I can’t entirely dismiss it. Upon reflection, it’s not quite a radical break from the work Mazzucchelli has done before, and it’s hardly an artistic Tourette’s outburst. One can see Asterios Polyp as an expansion on parts of his earlier efforts. The sections given to discussions of binary concepts and other intellectual matters certainly have their roots in the abstract monologues in City of Glass. Those sequences—the most celebrated in the book—were pointedly not attributed to Mazzucchelli. He did the final rendering, but the visual conception and breakdowns were handled by his collaborator, Paul Karasik. It’s only natural to expect him to try his hand at similar scenes of his own. And the conspicuously artificial quality of Asterios Polyp, specifically its use of stock characters, contrived repetitions, and absurdist touches, harkens back to the “The Death of Monsieur Absurde,” the last story in the third and final issue of Mazzucchelli’s self-published anthology series, Rubber Blanket. Before reading Asterios Polyp, I considered “Monsieur Absurde” tangential to Mazzucchelli’s œuvre. It may end up deserving reconsideration as one of the most important things he’s done, at least relative to his own development. Asterios Polyp, if nothing else, throws an entirely new light on Mazzucchelli’s previous work.
I’m also being unfair when I describe Mazzucchelli’s art in Asterios Polyp as having an ersatz quality to it. I have an instinctive revulsion to computer-generated repetitions in comics, and I can’t help but grit my teeth at the use of Photoshop to change the color of Mazzucchelli’s line and brushwork. However, none of that changes the fact that he is one of the finest draftsmen to ever work in the field, and Asterios Polyp may be his best-drawn work to date. The character renderings are packed with nuance. Mazzucchelli’s love of observed detail in settings is also very much on display in his depiction of the characters’ apartments and other interiors. The composer’s apartment in particular is just astounding; Mazzucchelli captures the extreme clutter while keeping the compositions entirely lucid. On top of that, the page design and pacing is nothing less than impeccable throughout—the book is a fast, breezy read. Once one gets used to the color effects, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that Asterios Polyp may be an unsurpassed piece of comics eye-candy.
And maybe that’s enough to justify thinking of it as one of the better comics of the past year. Those who love comics extend that sentiment to a lot of lowbrow or children’s material—work that we can’t recommend (or defend) to the less obsessed without a lot of caveats and apologies. At present, I’m pretty fixated on Alex Toth’s Zorro stories and Frank Frazetta’s romance comics, neither of which I could begin to recommend in the way I can with From Hell or Fun Home. One is either entertained by Toth or Frazetta’s consummate visual craftsmanship or one isn’t; the story material certainly isn’t worth bothering with on its own. That’s a generosity that we should consider extending to shallow “literary” comics like Asterios Polyp. It is, after all, one I certainly give to stylistically brilliant highbrow banality like Antonioni’s films after L’avventura or Updike’s fiction outside of the Rabbit novels. There should be no class distinctions in the arts, not even with entertainingly artful junk.
__________
Update by Noah: You can read the entire Asterios Polyp roundtable here.
Update by Noah: The comment thread to this post was damaged in a blog outage. I have restored comments manually, but be aware that there may still be minor errors. In particular, timestamps are not correct, and some comments may be slightly out of order.


26 Comments
…”arbitrary” color scheme?
Hardly consistent with the rest of your argument.
When I write “arbitrary,” I mean arbitrary as opposed to descriptive. My definition per Merriam-Webster: “based on or determined by individual preference or convenience rather than by necessity or the intrinsic nature of something.”
The notion of arbitrary color vs. descriptive color is something one comes across fairly often in discussions of 20th-century art, so it didn’t occur to me to explain the difference at length.
I certainly didn’t mean to suggest, as your comment implies, that the colors were randomly or capriciously used, or that they’re internally inconsistent in terms of Mazzucchelli’s intended effects. All I meant was that Mazzucchelli is not using color in a literal way. I’m sorry if my use of art-history jargon was confusing.
That’s a pretty sexy semantic distinction there, Robert, between arbitrary and descriptive color.
Is there a glossary of art-history jargon like that? ‘Cause I’d buy that real fast. (We have them in abundance in literature, but I’ve never found one for art history…)
Hmm, interesting. Illustrators also speak of ‘local color’, ie blue skies, green leaves.
Well, if it makes you feel better about the art, the color work could certainly have been done without photoshop and in a different era, through the use of color holds, i.e. each color represented by a separate sheet of acetate and getting its own spot color and plate (it just would have been a dense and expensive proposition).
From my 35-year-old memories of art school, I recall a distinction being made between ‘couleur diégétique’ and ‘couleur non-diégétique’. The color in AP is fascinating because it’s almost never diegetic, but remains narrative.
Although never carried to this level of sophistication, non-diegetic narrative color used to be a staple of color comics, if only in a crude way: for example, a villain screaming in rage might be entirely colored in a flat red, a frightened charcter would be green, etc…this was poneered in strips by George Wunder, who took over ‘Terry and the Pirates’ from Caniff; excellent examples could be found in the Marvel comics of the ’7Os colored by George Roussos.
With the switchover from hand-separated ‘crude’ coloring to computer coloring, these conventions fell by the wayside.
(aside– Mazzucchelli deserves credit for his skill in using yellow/purple duotone. Wedding complementary colors without birthing a continuous visual shriek is quite an accomplshment.
I’m sure that he did use Photoshop, but equally that he intervened at the print phase. Mazzucchelli deliberately trained in printmaking and printing after he left superhero comics.The very title of his anthology ‘Rubber Blanket’ is an homage to the humble offset press that he mastered.)
BTW, I took out AP from my local library for a thorough re-read. my conclusion is that, regarding the narrative, you are all wrong; it is rich and subtle and far from reductive.
I haven’t the energy, at this late date in the roundtable, to argue the point in detail. However, in all the words posted on this blog, nobody has commented on the comic and comedic dimension of the book. It is a satire, among other things. It is light and funny.
Was it Noah who thought the bum who half-blinds Asterios in the bar was shown to recognise him for some pretentious effect? Actually, they had a scene together earlier in the book.
When Willy Ilium probes Hana to know whether she’d been molested as a child, it’s taken here to be a movie-of-the-week piece of cheap psychologising, à la ‘Good Will Hunting’. But read the scene again: it’s not about Hana, except peripherally. It is about Willy and Asterios’ struggle for her.
WiLly: Tell me, were you abused as a child?
Asterios: What?
Willy: It’s not uncommon; Many women I know have suffered some form of physical or psychological abuse.
Asterios: Now THAT I think I’d know about.
Willy: Anuncle, an older brother, a trusted family friend, perhaps…,
Asterios: Hana, set the man straight.
Hana: Shouldn’t we start thinking about heading to the restaurant…?
Now, what happens in this exchange? We see that Willy is quick to sniff out and exploit another’s weaknesses. He’s fishing, but he is sensitive enough– in a malign way– to intuit this wound in Hana.
Asterios, on the other hand, is clueless, even though he’s Hana’s husband.
I could go on, scene by scene…but really, why bother…
Caro, if you want some art talk vocabulary, try ‘taut’, ‘numinous’, ‘necessary, and ‘tension’. That’ll do for a start, if judiciously placed.
Alex, I got that he met the bum earlier. I just thought it was also pretentious and heavy-handed.
I think the revelation of Hana’s sexual abuse is both cheap psychologizing — and even less appealing in that it is, as you say, more about Asterios than about Hana. The book’s resolute refusal to give a shit about Hana except as her story impinges on Asterios’ thwarted love is one of its least attractive aspects (and one of the many ways in which its narrative is cliched, in my view.)
Alex — I guess I haven’t said that I didn’t hate the book; I did find it light and funny and pleasurable. The only reading in my piece is a meta-discursive one.
My point isn’t that the discursive level is “bad.” But Noah’s right that it’s very conceptually and narratively familiar, and it doesn’t add anything to our existing map of that narrative. Because the narrative isn’t the point: showing how the narrative can be told in pictures is the point. But that is about new technique, not new ideas. Because working out these ideas visually didn’t actually change the idea…that’s what you’d need to argue to convince me that Noah’s wrong.
Noah, I didn’t feel like it was “resolutely” refusing to give a shit about Hana: I just thought she was a stereotype. But I’m less sensitive to that than you are.
It made you irritated, I think: it didn’t irritate me, it was a perfectly fine way to spend an hour, but it just kind of wasn’t very exciting. Early on I had sort of a sighing response: this is gonna be like like stationary biking on an incline. All you get is better muscles; you don’t actually get a better view.
I’ve been way more irritated, to be fair. The art really is great, which made it hard to be really pained by the process.
Sean–
If the computer applications didn’t leave artwork looking cold and sterile, I wouldn’t mind them. However, I can’t think of a single instance where I’ve seen them enhance visual expressiveness.
Caro–
As I recall, Van Gogh coined the term “arbitrary color” in one of his letters. My 20th-century art-history professor was fond of using it to describe the approach of Matisse and the other Fauve painters.
I don’t think there’s any art-history glossary comparable to Harmon & Holman’s Handbook to Literature. McLerrin and Patin’s Artwords and Atkins’ ArtSpeak aren’t bad, but they’re far from comprehensive, so I can’t recommend them.
Alex–
I certainly get that there’s a humorous dimension to the book. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I just didn’t find it interesting enough to comment on. Part of the reason is what Noah and Caroline articulate. Another is simply taste. There’s a confectionary quality to Asterios Polyp, which is the sort of thing I’ve always found off-putting. Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest is probably the exemplar of that kind of work, and I don’t care for it, either.
Gah! You don’t like Wilde?!
That’s a banishing-to-outer-darkness offense round these parts….
I don’t like the play. Cleverness for its own sake I think is best in very small doses. It becomes quite tiresome in large ones. I enjoy his aphorisms a great deal. I have yet to read Dorian Gray.
Noah — have you seen Velvet Goldmine?
I really like the way Haynes uses Wilde as a sort of magical-realist “archetype” for glam queerness; it’s a much more conceptual use of an archetype than Asterios and Hana. He does it again, full throttle, with Bob Dylan in I’m Not There. It’s a similar conceit to the one in Fate of the Artist about identity, but with “celebrity” layered in.
I saw and really didn’t like Velvet Goldmine….
Dorian Gray is great!
Domingos–
There are scenes in Antonioni’s later films where he rises to the level that he sustained throughout almost all of L’avventura. Examples include the argument in the car while it’s raining in La notte, and the closing montage in L’eclisse. (I’m guessing the latter is what you’re referring to as “the most important 7 minutes in the history of film.” Either that or the end of The Passenger.) However, beyond that the films just strike me as silly and pretentious. Antonioni, despite his “what are we coming to” tone, is just too enthralled with the glamour of the people he shows for me to take him very seriously. His saving grace is what may be the single most gorgeous filmmaking style in all of movies. His staging and shot design are so consistently imaginative that I can’t help but forgive all the moralistic bullshit of the stories.
Caro–
http://www.amazon.com/Thames-Hudson-Dictionary-Terms-World/dp/0500203652
http://www.amazon.com/Concise-Oxford-Dictionary-Paperback-Reference/dp/0192800434
Robert: yup, _L’Eclisse_ it is. When I see those gorgeous silent sequences by Seth showing Toronto (or, wherever) those 7 minutes always cross my mind.
dear me…we still have to deal with ‘Zabriskie Point’, though.
I prefer to ignore that… But I love Monica Vitti’s children’s story in _Red Desert_ (it’s in such contrast with the adult’s nauseous world in that film!). _Blow Up_ has its moments too (and a story by Julio Cortazar).
Oops! I just answered to a troll!… Sorry Robert…
Are you calling Alex a troll? I know he’s been in some bitter back and forthing on the TCJ message boards, but I certainly don’t consider him a troll. He’s way less disruptive and mean-spirited than I am! He’s going to be writing something for HU shortly in fact, if all goes well.
Troll or no troll I’m going to ignore him. I hope that he does the same with me. But I can only hope, of course…
Zabriskie Point had a good ending, if nothing else–endings were something Antonioni was generally pretty good at. Although I think De Palma’s homage/rip-off of it in The Fury is more fun.
Noah–
Your comment between #6 and #7 is missing. For those who are wondering, Noah condemned me for daring to say something less than laudatory about Oscar Wilde.
RSS FEED USERS PLEASE NOTE: I am going to be restoring comments lost in the recent blog outage by hand. This is going to make your feed very messy for the next little bit. My apologies, and thank you for your patience.
All right; I believe all comments are now restored. Time stamps are not correct in all cases, but the sequence of the conversation should be right. If you notice a mistake or a comment left out, please let me know.