The Philippine Online Chronicles

The Levels of Komiks Criticism: Interview with Gerry Alanguilan (Part 2)

In part one of our interview, we spoke with Gerry Alanguilan (inker for top-tier titles of Marvel, DC and Image--he is currently working with Lenil Yu on Ultimate Avengers: Crime and Punishment--and the writer-artist behind Wasted and Elmer about his recent post entitled "The Need for Serious Criticism". In Part One, Mr. Alanguilan discussed what he called the first level of komiks criticism. In the continuation of our interview, he addresses certain fears that might be raised regarding a robust criticism of komiks, and talks about the second and third levels of criticism.

Is there any danger that a greater emphasis on dissecting flawed works would scare away creators (or potential creators)? Or is that merely a risk that any creator of commercial content must learn to bear?

If an artist or creator is scared away by the prospect of his work being put under scrutiny, then that tells me many things. One, they don't love comics enough to stand by their work, and those who don't love comics cannot be expected to do their best. It's probably good that we don't see their work at all because chances are, it probably won't be any good. And if by chance their work holds promise, they won't have the opportunity to improve because they might be scared away by criticism anyway.

Part of the appeal, it seems, of creating an indie komik, would be the ability to produce a work which conforms only to the creator’s personal aesthetic, and no one else’s. Would external criticism still serve a function for those creators who profess to be creating only for themselves, or “for fun”, and not for a market?

Doing comics for fun is all right, but even then, you are creating these things because you want people to read them, and no matter what your intentions, people are going to react. Once a particular work is out there, anyone can chime in and say what they think. You might not think it's fun anymore when some blog calls your comic book crap. Even if you're having fun, it's always best to know what you're doing and do your best.

An artist cannot afford to "produce a work which conforms only to the creator’s personal aesthetic" if he doesn't even know how to write or draw properly, or have a grasp of even the most basic of artistic skills necessary to create comics (like anatomy, perspective and storytelling), or can't even spell properly.

Once an artist has mastered all the basic skills and technical aspects of comic book creation, and is now creating comics without any glaring flaws in anatomy and perspective and can tell a story visually competently... if he no longer commits misspellings or grammatical errors,  only then can he afford to produce work which conforms to his own personal aesthetic. And so we enter the Second Level of Criticism.

What do you mean be a second level of criticism?

In this level, a critic enters the level of subjectivity. If all technical aspects of the comic book are correct, all that's left to offer is an opinion on the worth, quality and substance of the work in question. In this level, many critics would probably disagree on particular aspect of the work, for it is their own personal opinion that guides their thoughts. They can tell us if they think that the work is any good or not, if they like it or not and why. This is the level of criticism under which fall many of the opinion columns and reviews online and in print publications.

This kind of criticism can benefit both the creator and fans. Through criticisms/reviews of comic books, fans can be guided as to which comic books they should check out or which ones to avoid. Although, speaking as a fan, I would most probably prefer to judge for myself. The purpose of reviews, for me as a fan, is to inform me that these comics exist and tell me where I can check them out.

It depends upon the creator if he wishes to listen to these opinions or not, because that's all they are.... opinions. The creator may decide that a certain bit of criticism is valid and allow it to help him, or he may decide that the critic doesn't know anything and proceed to ignore the criticism altogether.

Here we can apply all the arguments for the artist to have free rein, to conform to his own personal aesthetic without the need for critics, or fans, or feedback. There are truly artists who don't need this level of criticism, who can create works of genius on their own without the benefit of other people offering their opinions about their work.A critic can go ahead and write a massive dissertation on the merits of this creator's work, but to the creator, it probably wouldn't matter.

You also mentioned the possibility of a third level of criticism?

I'm tempted to say that there's even a Third Level of criticism, specially reserved for those works that have come to be known as extraordinary pieces of art.

In this case, the critics do not write for the benefit of the creator, but for the benefit of the fans that need guidance as to how to appreciate the work of the creator. This is why books upon books of analysis and critique on films like Citizen Kane or Godfather have been published. These are not written for the benefit of Orson Welles or Francis Ford Coppola. These books and articles are written for fans and for the students of film who want to learn what makes these films tick.

There are comic books that have become worthy of this kind of study and scrutiny. There's Watchmen of course, and Maus. There's also Sandman and Batman: Year One, and more recently, Asterios Polyp. The appreciation for these works can be increased when guided by knowledgeable and informed criticism, designed to help fans better appreciate the finer points of the work in question.

Do you have any advice you could give creators, regarding how to deal with criticism? Have you had any difficulty dealing with criticism in the past?

I've had my fair share of criticism. I still get it. One guy came up to me during Summer Komikon criticizing the way I wrote the dialogue in Elmer. It's up to me to decide which opinions are useful to me and those that are not. Yes, sometimes it feels like being stabbed in the heart when you don't read or hear good things about your work. I can still feel a sting when one Avengers fan openly expressed his disappointment upon learning I was inking Leinil Yu for Ultimate Avengers. But it comes with the job. Did I learn anything from that criticism? I didn't, so I can choose to ignore it.

One needs to develop thicker skin in this job. One has to hold on to a certain amount of EGO. A lot has been said about the artists' ego, and most of what has been said hasn't been good. But that's ridiculous to me. An artist SHOULD have an ego. He should have the confidence and belief that what he is doing is GOOD because it is this self confidence that allows him to create really good work. An artist's ego can take quite a battering when listening to too much negative criticism, so he can just choose to ignore it.