...

...that's the title of the review by Frances Colpitt of the show, 'Splat, Boom, Pow' which had its debut at the CAM in Houston, Texas recently. See 'Art in America' for October, 2003. It's no secret that comics have long ago found a place in the 'fine arts' - most famously in the works of Roy Lichtenstein.

Unfortunately, the show did not include one of the finest and most intellectual of comic artists working today, Chris Ware. And that's unfortunate, considering that Ware is a product of the University of Texas at Austin fine arts program.

Frances Colpitt is an often-published reviewer of various art venues who recently was appointed chair of the Dept of Art and Art History at UT San Antonio.

This situation has interested me for a long time. The work of Lichtenstein is very worthwhile, and in fact I have a reproduction of one his pictures on a wall in my home. However, my own angle is that there were (and perhaps are) working comic book illustrators who were great illustrators in their own right. I have seen many comic panels that I would like to have blown up repros. of to hang on a wall. These might be pictures from science fiction, werid, crime, and romance comics.

And it does seem to me that some comic book illustrators were artists of great genius. For instance, Graham Ingels, the renowned EC Comics horror illustrator, was, in my view, to art what Poe and Lovecraft are to weird literature. In some ways, Ingels can be said to be a legitimate heir to Dore and Alberto Martini and other 'fine art' illustrators of the weird. But will someone whose significant work is found in the illustration of horrific comic book stories ever be widely recognized as a truly great artist? Right now, that doesn't seem to likely. After all, even the great illustrator Alberto Martini is scarcely a household word,

Anyway, getting back to the main point, I do not mean to suggest that the only authentic comic art has been done in the weird field. There are, for instance, many 'romance' comics and 'crime' comics from the 1950's which contain panels, I would argue, fully as interesting as any Lichtenstein picuture (and which actually influenced Lichtenstein).

I think part of what I am getting at is that for the authentic artists, the art sort of takes over and emerges, whatever medium they are working in. Ingels, basically, was hacking out a living doing comic stories. Yet, in the course of doing that, certain forces deep within him took over and led him to produce truly terrifying, genuinely nightmarish art. (If you are interested in terrifying art, I would recommend Ingel's 'Horror We? How's Bayou?' and 'Ooze in the Cellar?' as interesting examples for study. You can find them in comic book stores with EC reprints.) If you don't like weird art, then stay away from them. They will scare the hell out of you.

That's a given - and only Mani Deli would argue with you about it.

I am not a cartoonist and really haven't had much of a chance to really get to know one, but I'd guess that most who earn their living at it don't much care if it's seen as art. I'd guess they are more interested in entertainment - and the subtle instillation of 'ideas' through their comic strips. For example: political cartoons.

Looking at web sites that pop up when I type 'Chris Ware' into Google, I find web sites by fans of his who have framed his published comics and are bartering on the web for other stuff of his they don't have. So there is a 'cult of collectors' for comic strips, just as there is for every other imaginable thing.

I've been around quite a few cartoonists over the years, and I must say their is a strong anti-artist crowd. Dan O'Neil told me on more than one occassion how much he despises artists. The last time was when I was trying to set-up a visiting lectureship for him at UC Davis art, working through Wayne Thiebaud (who is a strong cartoonist advocate.) The sentiment was best expressed in one of R. Crumb's splash panels on the back of one of the early Zap Comix: 'Don't listen to this Guy!' and a bold arrow points to a stereotypical artist standing on an Ivory Tower, 'Anyone can draw!' It was very funny. On the other hand, Spain Rodreguez' work is full of art history references. I think he had one story about the Venus of Wallendorf attacking civilization or something.

Chris Ware is really hot, just as you say. Very beautiful work. But there's always a Maginot line that Comix can't cross and remain Comix. But no one really knows where it is.

Yes the statement means nothing and is in a category I consider art school double talk.

All Lichtenstein ever did was color in comic blowups. This gave critics orgasms as they thought is was super original. The only thing I found duller was Warhol's stupid soup cans.

You will note that Artzy fartzy 'originality' fans rarely address this crap. Tired of Modern Art? See-

Well, Mani, perhaps my language was imprecise, but I think I was at least touching on something significant. Let's move over to photography for a moment. Consider Atget, who is regarded almost universally nowadays as a great photographic artist. Yet, when he was doing his major work