From Ger... floating on his boat... the story on that Cerebus piece currently at the Heritage auction:
It is indeed the original drawing that was used for the cover of #272. Matthew commissioned me to finish off the character and add a background. So, the description on the HA website as a Cerebus splash page is somewhat misleading. The church in the background looks different because the photo used on the cover (which I had nothing to do with, by the way) is of a Christian church and the drawing I did is a Synagogue since he's supposed to be a Rabbi after all.
And that, as Paul Harvey used to say, is the rest of the story. Good day.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
July 27, 2011 Not quite a page?
Thanks to M. Kitchen for the alert, here.
Heritage has this up with the label:
Gerhard "Cerebus the Aardvark #272 Splash page Original Art"
It's listed as 10x12.5" and I am no where near any copies of issue 272 to know what this is. I'll update when one of you Smaartvarks figures it out.
http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7036&lotNo=92254#Photo
UPDATE: As Smaartvark Margaret points out - this sure matches the foreground Cerebus figure on the cover to #272:
Heritage has this up with the label:
Gerhard "Cerebus the Aardvark #272 Splash page Original Art"
It's listed as 10x12.5" and I am no where near any copies of issue 272 to know what this is. I'll update when one of you Smaartvarks figures it out.
http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7036&lotNo=92254#Photo
UPDATE: As Smaartvark Margaret points out - this sure matches the foreground Cerebus figure on the cover to #272:
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
July 19, 2011 reinvention
Wow. I am about to swing so far off-kilter that I think I will be on-kilter or perhaps in-kilter, whatever the heck kilter is in the first place.
I am always impressed by clever and creative ideas, and I think this is a remarkably clever and creative way to pitch this topic.
The youtube posting is linked to these words.
And, FYI, the word kilter means "good condition." Its etymology goes back to the 1630s as the English word "kelter." Other than this, the origin is unknown.
I am always impressed by clever and creative ideas, and I think this is a remarkably clever and creative way to pitch this topic.
The youtube posting is linked to these words.
And, FYI, the word kilter means "good condition." Its etymology goes back to the 1630s as the English word "kelter." Other than this, the origin is unknown.
Sunday, July 10, 2011
July 10, 2011 a widdle art news
eBay no. 200628024886
Seller: greatexpectations
Buyer: jeffwucookie
Price: $96.00
awwwwww.....
Seller: greatexpectations
Buyer: jeffwucookie
Price: $96.00
awwwwww.....
Sunday, July 03, 2011
July 3, 2010 Untergang (Downfall)
You have seen, I am sure, one or more of those bazillion parodies where the video clip from some Hilter movie is used to show him ranting about ... anything: peer review, Windows, the World Series, bacon and eggs, not getting a Wii, and so on. One of these is just begging to be done where Hitler is reading a certain issue of The Comics Journal and gets offended by a certain comparison. If you can't figure out THAT illusion, then you are just not paying attention.
But I digress.
I had never wondered about the source material for this video clip until recently.
In case you don't know, there is a heck of a movie under there. Inspired by the documentary named "Blind Spot: Hilter's Secretary" (itself simply one long, contemporary interview with the only surviving member of the inner circle, before she died in 2002 - it's quite compelling), the underlying movie used by the parody-makers is called "Untergang" ("Downfall").
I should stop here. There is an inevitable tangle that anyone who has written anything about this movie gets into.
It is performed in German with English subtitles that you get used to really fast. The performances are first rate, and by every report, even those who were negative on the film, the work of the lead actor, Bruno Ganz, is astounding. Also, by every account, the film has as much legitimate historical detail as you might get on the last days of the Third Reich.
The debate around this movie is the reason to watch it. Controversy is not the right word for it. Breaking taboo comes much closer. Until this film, it was important (and probably still is) for Hilter to remain as a monstrous, unsympathetic character, or as a buffoon, a cartoon, or otherwise separated from, you know, the rest of us. Collectively, the only way we seem to be able to deal with him is to make sure he's off to the side, uniquely inhuman. It provides a better explanation than the one we are less comfortable with: wrestling with Hitler's status as a human being.
You see how you reacted to that? Taboo.
The negative reviews all reflect the same thing: nothing about the film is bad except the existence of the film itself. Because Hitler is portrayed as a human being and not as a parody, then the film's problem is in the insufficiency of its response to Hitler's inhumanity. It's a Möbius loop.
Roger Ebert does a really good job of addressing the paradox at the end of his review:
"Admiration I did not feel. Sympathy I felt in the sense that I would feel it for a rabid dog, while accepting that it must be destroyed. I do not feel the film provides a sufficient response to what Hitler actually did, because I feel no film can, and no response would be sufficient. As we regard this broken and pathetic Hitler, we realize that he did not alone create the Third Reich, but was the focus for a spontaneous uprising by many of the German people, fueled by racism, xenophobia, grandiosity and fear. He was skilled in the ways he exploited that feeling, and surrounded himself by gifted strategists and propagandists, but he was not a great man, simply one armed by fate to unleash unimaginable evil. It is useful to reflect that racism, xenophobia, grandiosity and fear are still with us, and the defeat of one of their manifestations does not inoculate us against others."
This might also help explain why this particular movie ends up with hundreds of parody clips that reinforce the idea of an insane rant against anything, and of acceptance of failure. The clip is iconic because it is the point in the film where Hilter is depicted as understanding - to the degree that is possible - his downfall.
The director of "Untergang," commenting on the parodies, gives insight into the movie itself:
"The point of the film was to kick these terrible people off the throne that made them demons, making them real and their actions into reality. I think it’s only fair if now it’s taken as part of our history, and used for whatever purposes people like."
End of review.
It's already the 4th of July here in Beijing.
Happy Independence Day, America.
But I digress.
I had never wondered about the source material for this video clip until recently.
In case you don't know, there is a heck of a movie under there. Inspired by the documentary named "Blind Spot: Hilter's Secretary" (itself simply one long, contemporary interview with the only surviving member of the inner circle, before she died in 2002 - it's quite compelling), the underlying movie used by the parody-makers is called "Untergang" ("Downfall").
I should stop here. There is an inevitable tangle that anyone who has written anything about this movie gets into.
It is performed in German with English subtitles that you get used to really fast. The performances are first rate, and by every report, even those who were negative on the film, the work of the lead actor, Bruno Ganz, is astounding. Also, by every account, the film has as much legitimate historical detail as you might get on the last days of the Third Reich.
The debate around this movie is the reason to watch it. Controversy is not the right word for it. Breaking taboo comes much closer. Until this film, it was important (and probably still is) for Hilter to remain as a monstrous, unsympathetic character, or as a buffoon, a cartoon, or otherwise separated from, you know, the rest of us. Collectively, the only way we seem to be able to deal with him is to make sure he's off to the side, uniquely inhuman. It provides a better explanation than the one we are less comfortable with: wrestling with Hitler's status as a human being.
You see how you reacted to that? Taboo.
The negative reviews all reflect the same thing: nothing about the film is bad except the existence of the film itself. Because Hitler is portrayed as a human being and not as a parody, then the film's problem is in the insufficiency of its response to Hitler's inhumanity. It's a Möbius loop.
Roger Ebert does a really good job of addressing the paradox at the end of his review:
"Admiration I did not feel. Sympathy I felt in the sense that I would feel it for a rabid dog, while accepting that it must be destroyed. I do not feel the film provides a sufficient response to what Hitler actually did, because I feel no film can, and no response would be sufficient. As we regard this broken and pathetic Hitler, we realize that he did not alone create the Third Reich, but was the focus for a spontaneous uprising by many of the German people, fueled by racism, xenophobia, grandiosity and fear. He was skilled in the ways he exploited that feeling, and surrounded himself by gifted strategists and propagandists, but he was not a great man, simply one armed by fate to unleash unimaginable evil. It is useful to reflect that racism, xenophobia, grandiosity and fear are still with us, and the defeat of one of their manifestations does not inoculate us against others."
This might also help explain why this particular movie ends up with hundreds of parody clips that reinforce the idea of an insane rant against anything, and of acceptance of failure. The clip is iconic because it is the point in the film where Hilter is depicted as understanding - to the degree that is possible - his downfall.
The director of "Untergang," commenting on the parodies, gives insight into the movie itself:
"The point of the film was to kick these terrible people off the throne that made them demons, making them real and their actions into reality. I think it’s only fair if now it’s taken as part of our history, and used for whatever purposes people like."
End of review.
It's already the 4th of July here in Beijing.
Happy Independence Day, America.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)