
A true story. Featured in my letter, “One thing after another.”

A true story. Featured in my letter, “One thing after another.”
Today’s newsletter begins:
Like many book nerds, I got sucked into the NYTimes list of 100 Best Books of the 21st Century. I am with Paul Ford that “Why Wasn’t I Consulted?” is the fundamental question of the internet, and so a list like this one is bound to get big clicks…
One thing that struck me is that only two (great) comics made the list — Alison Bechdel’s Fun Home (2006) and Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis(2004).
I thought it might be fun for me to list a few more books from this century that have pictures and words that have made a big impact on me in the past 24 years…
No paywall today so you can read the whole thing here.

While taking a photo of Kristen Radtke’s wonderful book, Seek You: A Journey Through American Loneliness, I noticed my iPhone camera was trying to recognize some of the faces in the comic.

Humans are programmed to see faces in almost anything. But I got to wondering how realistically drawn a face had to be in a comic strip for the machine to recognize it. So I pulled out one of my comics anthologies and did some tests:
Fascinating what facial recognition picks up… ? pic.twitter.com/vLiPYdPfCc
— Austin Kleon (@austinkleon) September 7, 2021
The funniest and most meta recognition was in this strip of James Kochalka’s American Elf, in which he draws himself realistically:

When it came to Love and Rockets, I expected the machine to recognize Jaime, but not Beto. I was wrong:

Another sampling of cartoonists whose faces got detected, clockwise, from top left: Chris Ware, Adrian Tomine, Daniel Clowes, and, surprisingly, Ben Katchour.

My initial hunch — that the more abstract a face is, the less chance the machine would recognize it — turns out to be generally true, but not completely.
For example: @dribnet on Twitter pointed out that you can create a drawing that looks abstract to humans, but gets picked up by face detectors,” which he’s done here and here:
I don’t have anywhere that I’m going with this, I just thought it was interesting…

In a conversation with Cheryl Strayed about her book, The Secret to Superhuman Strength, the cartoonist Alison Bechdel said:
Something I thought about a lot as I was drawing this book is what a gloriously physical activity it is to draw. I draw for hours on end and it’s like an endurance exercise. There’s something physical that happens with that line coming out of my hand onto the page that is different from what I might type or do on the computer.
It is very embodied and I feel like drawing is a tracing of the world for me. I’m showing you what I’m seeing and then you’re holding it in your hands. It’s like this touch-based transmission.
For me, this fact is both the magic and the curse of comics.
One of the brutal realities for cartoonists is that drawing is such an embodied transmission that readers who are unfamiliar with your work might be initially repelled by your drawings and not be able to “get past” them to start turning the pages. (And, in fact, there really is no “getting past” the drawing of a comic — the drawing is the medium is the message.)
Comics is a labor-intensive medium, and the ratio of work put in by the maker vs. work put in by the reader is already super high. But because so much of the hand is in the work, it also has an initial visceral fail point, much like a podcast or a film: if the audience doesn’t like the narrator’s voice or the actor’s face, sometimes it’s adios before the story even begins.
This is one thing to be said for plain ol’ typeset prose: there’s very little right away on the page to repel the reader before they even dip into the work. Just words on a page, what do they say?
Now, keeping the reader reading, that’s hard no matter what medium you’re working in…

From the Dept. of No Coincidences: I was flipping through John McPhee’s Basin and Range and Stephen Jay Gould’s Time’s Arrow, Time’s Cycle: Myth and Metaphor in the Discovery of Geological Time, two books which inspired passages in Kevin Huizenga’s The River at Night, when I opened up the Sunday NYTimes magazine and found Yohanca Delgado’s letter of recommendation for thinking about geologic time.
Delgado has A.D.H.D. and a kind of “time blindness” that makes it hard for her to keep track of the passing of time. She praises Marcia Bjornerud’s Timefulness: How Thinking Like a Geologist Can Help Save the World:
[O]ur solar system has a 10-billion-year life span; it will end when the sun enters its red-giant phase and begins engulfing its orbiting planets, including Earth. In that context, Bjornerud writes, mountains are “ephemeral.” Much of what we once believed to be eternal and unchanging about our planet is vital and dynamic, constantly shifting around us. We are still deciphering parts of the planet’s geologic history, in hopes of anticipating future, potentially cataclysmic, events.
“For me,” Delgado writes, “holding time in a much larger perspective eases the day-to-day anxieties of living.”

In The River at Night, the main character, Glenn Ganges, has trouble sleeping and spends most of the book thinking about the nature of time. Comics is a medium well-suited to exploring time, as explained in this interview with Art Spiegelman:
in a comic you have various panels. Those panels are each units of time. You see them simultaneously. So you have various moments in time simultaneously made present in space. And that is what Maus is about. It is about the past and present intertwining irrevocably and permanently.
A great example is R. Crumb’s “A Short History of America.”

Maybe one of the most impressive examples is Richard McGuire’s Here.
In 1989, Mr. McGuire, then an aspiring New York artist better known for playing bass in the postpunk band Liquid Liquid, published a 36-panel comic that hopped backward and forward through millions of years without leaving the confines of a suburban living room, thanks to the use of pop-up frames-within-frames inspired by the relatively new Microsoft Windows… now he has popped up through a wormhole of his own, with a full-color, book-length version of “Here” that once again transforms a corner of his childhood living room in New Jersey into a staging ground for all of earthly history.
Each two-page spread features a fixed view of the room in a certain year, with pop-up windows giving glimpses of what might have been visible in exactly that spot at various moments in the past and future: from the tail of a passing dinosaur to a 1960s children’s birthday party to a quiet late-21st-century fireside chat.


The irony of comics being such a great medium for depicting and thinking about time is that comics take forever to make.
“The holy grail is to spend less time making the picture than it takes people to look at it,” Banksy supposedly once said. For cartoonists, the ratio of time spent drawing to time spent reading is enormously skewed towards the labor of drawing.
I’ve gotten away from myself, here, and lost track of time, as one often does when thinking about time.
Picturing “deep time” can keep things in perspective, just as picturing “deep space” can keep things in perspective.

But the opposite, of course, is always possible. Thinking of one’s insignificance can spend you spiraling, as it did Sally Draper, a character on Mad Men:
When I think about forever I get upset. Like the Land O’Lakes butter has that Indian girl, sitting holding a box, and it has a picture of her on it, holding a box, with a picture of her holding a box. Have you ever noticed that?
(She’s describing the Droste Effect.)
This site participates in the Amazon Affiliates program, the proceeds of which keep it free for anyone to read.