Beano Punk

[Ginger]

Kid, that's a good strip, not formulaic and not a groaner of a pun in sight, but it doesn't change my view that A LOT of the writing in the current Beano is as funny as it's ever been, and funnier than MUCH of the older style of writing, which unlike your example WAS formulaic and laden with dreadful puns.

[Kid Robson]

Kid, that's a good strip, not formulaic and not a groaner of a pun in sight, but it doesn't change my view that A LOT of the writing in the current Beano is as funny as it's ever been, and funnier than MUCH of the older style of writing, which unlike your example WAS formulaic and laden with dreadful puns.

Well, I don't think that anyone would ever dispute the fact that most (if not all) comics at various times were, to some degree or other, formulaic and relied on a pun to wrap things up. Bax and Law (new series, BBC 1 at 9 tonight) were amongst the cream of the crop when it came to the best that comics had to offer in their day. However, I don't think that the way things are done have changed all that much now to be honest. There's still 'funny', 'not so funny', and 'completely underwhelming'. However, it didn't seem to matter so much in years gone by, because comics were so relatively inexpensive that, even if a reader only liked two or three strips an issue, it was still worth his while forking out his 4d or 5d.

Nowadays, perhaps they've tweaked the formula somewhat, but there's still a formula: Bill Whizz's stories still revolve around him being fast, Dennis's around him being a menace, and Minnie's around her being a a bit of a minx. Perhaps what you've been noticing recently is what I commented on a couple of times in my blog a few months back - that the stories seemed to be trying to accommodate a wider age range of readers, rather than just 4 or 5 year olds.

But I suppose it's all down to 'yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice' as to what's funny. The Beano had improved for a while in comparison to what it's been like over the last few years (and it may be that contrast which you've noticed), but has now slipped back in my estimation. However humorous some current strips may be, I don't think any of them (the ones I've seen, obviously) even come close to topping Bax and Law at their best*.

In my humble opinion of course.

(*I should perhaps add that it's not just down to nostalgia - many of the stories I'm thinking of I didn't see until I was an adult, long after they were first published.)

[Bigwords]

The final straw came (not how to make a Molotov cocktail as is widely believed) when Kids Rule Ok featured a group of youths kicking in the head of a policeman.

It was a little subtler than that, even - the man isn't explicitly a policeman, but having his suit colored blue was enough for the recall. The nearby police helmet gave people all the ammunition they needed to get it banned, though it wasn't as clear-cut as some seem to want it to be.

Punk, to my mind, wasn't that you had to be a virtuoso, it was the 'just do it' attitude. Ideas were more important than being able to play a million notes an hour.

It is fascinating to see the influence of the punk ethos in the small press and underground comics, which wholeheartedly delved into the aesthetics - cut up newspaper letters used in creating text, photographs manipulated and distorted, scratchy penmanship... If anything, the rise of the numerous indie comics in the 80s has a direct line back to the heady days of the late seventies and early eighties where doing things yourself was encouraged rather than following the masses. I may be simplifying it a bit, but the influence is clear even into the present with small press titles such as Sick Happy Idle taking on the look and attitude. And being very amusing, to boot.

I'm still struggling with prog rock....anyone?

Pssst? Deadline? The Adventures of Luther Arkwright?

Well, I don't think that anyone would ever dispute the fact that most (if not all) comics at various times were, to some degree or other, formulaic and relied on a pun to wrap things up.

Formula is not, in and of itself, a bad thing, especially when it allows the writer to come up with a strip which smashes the formula and gets the attention of the readers. It is something that needs to be weighed against repetition, but it can work well in the right hands.

[starscape]

I didn't go into the 80s but clear parallels there between indie music and indie comics.

I think there was enough 'prog comics' in the 80s/90s but I mean some overly-verbose comics at the same time as Warlord, just ready to be kicked into touch. The nearest I get was Vulcan but that's a poor comparison. Is there a better one?

[Bigwords]

Is there a better one?

When did Night-Raven get really, really weird? That must have been late 70s or *just* into the 80s...

Always did like text stories in comics.

[Ginger]

Well, I don't think that anyone would ever dispute the fact that most (if not all) comics at various times were, to some degree or other, formulaic and relied on a pun to wrap things up. Bax and Law (new series, BBC 1 at 9 tonight) were amongst the cream of the crop when it came to the best that comics had to offer in their day. However, I don't think that the way things are done have changed all that much now to be honest. There's still 'funny', 'not so funny', and 'completely underwhelming'. However, it didn't seem to matter so much in years gone by, because comics were so relatively inexpensive that, even if a reader only liked two or three strips an issue, it was still worth his while forking out his 4d or 5d.

Yes, well, maybe you're right. It was, is, and probably always will be a bit of a mixed bag. And I'm certainly not going to argue about the quality of Law and Baxendale's work, they're two of my absolute favourite artists (though I wouldn't know if they wrote their own stuff. I've a feeling Baxendale did, did Law?)

Nowadays, perhaps they've tweaked the formula somewhat, but there's still a formula: Bill Whizz's stories still revolve around him being fast, Dennis's around him being a menace, and Minnie's around her being a a bit of a minx.

I think there's a difference between formulaic writing and character. Ball Boy has now become a very funny if slightly bonkers satire of the modern game. Dennis is well written at the moment. And Billy Whizz is mixing things up with a continuing storyline, which is innovative as well as being funny.

But yes, as you hint at, debating what's funny is as subjective as debating what food you like. There's not much point, perhaps.
Some good stuff on this thread though, interesting conversation.

[Kid Robson]

I don't think that Law wrote his own stuff, although Bax did to an extent later in his career. He also embelished other writers' scripts that he worked on, adding all kinds of madness. He claimed that there was a certain stage where he wrote everything he drew, but this has been disputed by at least one writer who claimed to supply him with scripts.

[philcom55]

In some ways I've always thought of drawing comics as a kind of performance art so that, like musicians, actors or comedians, it doesn't really matter whether they write their own material or not.

[Kid Robson]

In some ways I've always thought of drawing comics as a kind of performance art so that, like musicians, actors or comedians, it doesn't really matter whether they write their own material or not.

Very true, Phil - just so long as, whoever writes the scripts, they're funny.

[ISPYSHHHGUY]

Comics artists with a strong personal style are given great freedom to put in any imaginitive bits-of-business or 'improvements' they see fit to the script supplied to them......in fact this is often encouraged by the Editors.

'Ghosting' of course is far more restricting----I once had the opportunity to try out a Roger the Dodger two-page set, and Mr Kerr the Editor provided me with a nice letter that nevertheless made it very clear that any submission I embarked on had to adhere to the Nixon version, right down to the most minute detail [ie: you could put in a mouse sitting on a kerb eating a sausage off a fork----even if unscripted-----as long as it looked 'Nixonesque']


Although this uniform approach helps the Beano brand name, it's not absolutely ideal for the 'individualist' artist, but often this is the way to get the proverbial 'foot in the door' which can hopefully lead to greater personal creativity for the cartoonist.

[Ginger]

In some ways I've always thought of drawing comics as a kind of performance art so that, like musicians, actors or comedians, it doesn't really matter whether they write their own material or not.

Another very interesting point, Phil. I've never thought of it like that before.

[Ginger]

But haven't you ever felt a bit let down when you find out, say, a stand-up you admire doesn't write their own material?

[felneymike]

Action had a campaign in the newspapers and TV calling for it to be banned. Basically, it was Dirty Harry, Jaws and Rollerball (all Cert 18/X films) in comics for children. The final straw came (not how to make a Molotov cocktail as is widely believed) when Kids Rule Ok featured a group of youths kicking in the head of a policeman.

The policeman getting his head kicked in (well, more accurately, about to be attacked) was one of the main controversies, but another was a girl in the crowd throwing a bottle at a player in Look out for Lefty. Football hooligans were a hot-button topic at the time (I have some roughly contemporary Roy of the Rovers issues with pitch invasions), and it looked like the comic was encouraging them.

The "How to make a molotov cocktail" thing was in New Eagle in 1982/3. It was in a weird story called The Hand, where a normal guy gets a new hand, transplanted from a mafia boss. The hand wants to kill the mobsters responsible for it's original owner's death!

[starscape]

The hand wants to kill the mobsters responsible for it's original owner's death!

That happens quite a lot. When oh when will these so-called scientists learn???