| |
A most eventful excursion
This morning, I was at an interview for a job with the Scottish Qualifications Authority, the body in charge of designing and conferring all non-degree awards in Scotland. The post in question is an administrative one, and it’s a part-time (three days per week), temporary (three months) venture, but we’ve all got to start somewhere, as they say, and I’d like to be able to get some money coming in again (I’ve been putting all my unemployment benefit rakings into a PhD fund). Of course, being an interview, I had to wear a suit and tie, which, as you probably know, I absolutely loathe. (Can someone please explain to me the point of a tie? I can’t think of a more useless item of clothing.)

Anyway, while I was out, I took the opportunity to do two things. First, I went to Burger King and ate one of their burgers - something I haven’t done in many a year. Not much has changed: they’re still better than McDonalds’ burgers, but they sit like a lump of lead in your stomach and very quickly leave you feeling empty. Second, I went to Borders to spend a £25 book token I had lying around. I was rather foolishly hoping they’d be stocking HD DVDs and that I’d find something to my fancy, but evidently Borders still think it’s the 20th century, so I had to settle for good old-fashioned literature instead. I picked up The Peoples of Middle-earth, Christopher Tolkien’s account of his father’s writing of the Appendices to The Lord of the Rings, and a copy of the original graphic novel of V for Vendetta by Alan Moore and David Lloyd. Unfortunately, the only version I could find had been subjected to an incredibly naff colouring job (the original publication was black and white, but evidently nowadays readers want their comics in colour, no matter how crummy that colour might be), but it’s better than nothing, and the paint job is so faint that, if I squint hard enough, I can just about manage to make it look monochromatic. It also happens to be printed on something closely approximating toilet paper, which, for £16.99, seems a bit mean, but that’s evidently how many people like their comics. Personally, I prefer the glossy surface of the most recent Asterix re-releases.
Speaking of Asterix, I note that the first two albums, Asterix the Gaul and Asterix and the Golden Sickle, have recently been re-released in a larger print format with new covers and, according to the official Asterix blog, completely re-inked and re-coloured panels.
Personally, I’m of two minds about this. On the one hand, many of the books do have very poor painting, especially the first four titles, and, in addition, many of them, even comparatively recent ones, suffer from what I imagine is erosion on the master plates themselves, resulting in lines that are faint and at times lost entirely, DVNR-style (Asterix and the Soothsayer is particularly affected). At the same time, though, these books are products of their time, and any attempt to bring them “into line” by giving them all the same colour palette and lettering style seems like meddling with a piece of history. (It’s also incredibly pointless because, even if you standardise the colouring, you still have to contend with the fact that the look of the characters and indeed the overall art style have continued to evolve with every album.) I can’t deny that many were produced in less than ideal circumstances, but it all seems a bit intrusive to me. The first eight books were, a few years back, released re-coloured and re-inked (although I believe that these most recent releases re-colour them yet again), and, while the likes of Asterix and the Goths, which was incredibly poorly coloured in its original state, certainly benefited, others, such as Asterix and the Banquet, which already looked very nice, lost a lot of their vibrance and subtlety in their new homogenised versions.
Still, part of me is actually quite tempted to pick up at least one of the new books and see whether these re-issues are worthwhile. The €14 price tag at Amazon.fr is pretty damn steep, though, and, morbid as it is, I’m also a little concerned that Uderzo will either retire or pop his clogs before he can finish re-doing the cover art for each book.
PS. You can view a Flash demonstration of the “restoration” process if you’re interested.
|
| |
Posted: Friday, December 08, 2006 at 5:48 PM
| Comments: 9
Categories: Books
| General
| HD DVD
| PhD
Comments
1.
I generally prefer original colors for comics: the horrors I had to watch, made by wimpy users of Photoshop on old Disney comics such as Carl Barks'... (btw, that's the same tool that makes 90% of Marvel/DC/Image monthly books look identical and tragically flat... give me Steve Oliff back, please!)
Not all color remakes are bad, obviously, but making both b/w AND new colors available at the sime time would be the optimum solution.
For example, here V for Vendetta had 1 newsstand edition (pocket format) and 2 book shop editions: the DC-colored one, comic book size; the B/W one, giant sized and giant priced. Unfortunately, the B/W had not hard cover, so I stayed with my Eighties-colored DC one I bougth many years ago: at least it was not made with Photoshop!
Posted by: MCP, December 8, 2006 6:43 PM
2.
It's a very long time since I read an Asterix book (my probably-mouldering collection is tucked away somewhere at my brother's house, I think), but all that re-inking and re-colouring alarmed me a bit.
Fair enough if it's "restoration", but to actually change it seems disturbingly close to George Lucas territory.
Posted by: Philly Q, December 9, 2006 12:39 AM
3.
It is incredibly Lucas-like, isn’t it? To be honest, if Uderzo genuinely wants to homogenise the look of these books, he might as well just start working his way through the series and redrawing every book. Newly redrawn editions would probably be a more welcome prospect than new stories, given that the last few Asterix books have been pretty cringe-worthy (Asterix and the Falling Sky being a particular nadir).
To be honest, all this recolouring makes me think of the colour theories John Kricfalusi posts on his blog, always going on about modern cartoons and the fact that they all use the same generic, eye-searing colour palette. This is exactly what he’s talking about: the sky is always the same blue, the grass is always the same green - no subtlety or use of specific hues to evoke mood at all.
Posted by: Whiggles, December 9, 2006 8:12 AM
4.
Same plague in videogames, indeed: the same set of boring textures used over and over again in far too many "realistic" games.
'Hey, we want to depict reality, so why work hard when the textures are already done once and for all by some generic middleware?'
Posted by: MCP, December 9, 2006 9:20 AM
5.
"if Uderzo genuinely wants to homogenise the look of these books, he might as well just start working his way through the series and redrawing every book."
True. But the problem with that (not that it's going to happen, of course, so this is purely academic) is that his artwork - for me - was at its best in the Olympic Games, Switzerland, Mansions Of The Gods period, and when was that, late 60s? The later ones (that I've seen) seemed to get a bit sloppier.
Posted by: Philly Q, December 9, 2006 11:40 AM
6.
You’re not alone. I wouldn’t say his work has become sloppier - if anything, it’s become too precise, if you ask me. The most recent books have a rather stilted appearance to them, with the characters often looking very flat. I suppose it’s only natural, given his age, but a lot, too, is probably to do with the fact that a team of inkers and colourists now work from his pencil roughs, which probably robs them of some of their personality. Not that that was a problem during the period you describe, though, when, from the mid-60s until Asterix and the Laurel Wreath, his brother inked and coloured them.
Generally speaking I think the art style went through a three-part evolution. The first few books were very rough and primitive-looking, but that quickly gave way to a very rounded, polished style. Then, the rounded style gradually gave way to something more detailed, which also resulted in the characters taking on slightly more “lifelike” expressions and proportions. This seems to have continued, and the result is that the exaggeration of the designs is no longer as pronounced as it once was - e.g. Asterix is no longer so short, Obelix is no longer quite so fat. I think that a lot of the immediacy of the period you describe came from the speed at which the books were created. The stories were, after all, serialised in the Pilote magazine at two pages per week, with Uderzo drawing two complete stories per year when he was at his most prolific. Nowadays, there’s a gap of somewhere between four and five years between each album, and, while I doubt that he spends all that time drawing them, he certainly doesn’t have a tight schedule to adhere to any more, and as a result is quite possibly “refining” his drawings down to the point that they lose all their character.
Posted by: Whiggles, December 9, 2006 12:07 PM
7.
You're spot on, the characters did become more "lifelike" and as a result, I think, less likeable. And that's interesting about Uderzo's brother, I didn't know about his involvement.
Posted by: Philly Q, December 9, 2006 12:34 PM
8.
Have you read The Complete Guide to Asterix, Phil? It was released in 1994 and currently fetches silly amounts of money on eBay (my brother sold his for £50). I still have my copy, and it’s filled with trivia like that. By far its most interesting chapter is on the English translations, where it is revealed that certain books, such as Asterix in Corsica, Asterix and the Banquet and Asterix and the Chieftain’s Shield, are so reliant on French cultural jokes in their original versions that the translators essentially had to rewrite entire pages in order for them to make sense to English reader. (This also explains why the books were originally published out of sequence here, with a number of early ones not appearing until as many as 15 years after their French counterparts: originally, they were thought to be untranslatable.)
Posted by: Whiggles, December 9, 2006 12:47 PM
9.
I haven't, Mike - it was published long after I stopped collecting Asterix. I'm always "intending" to revisit the books, but never get round to it.
I'm not surprised about the extensive rewrites - I think Anthea Bell and Derek Hockridge (hope those names are right, I'm dragging them up from 25-year-old memories!) deserve a lot of credit. You could always tell, even just from the character names, that they put in a hell of a lot of effort to make the jokes work.
I always assumed things like Asterix in Corsica and Asterix and the Normans were delayed for some kind of cultural reasons, but I could never understand why Asterix and the Golden Sickle took so long!
Posted by: Philly Q, December 9, 2006 1:06 PM
Comments on this entry and all entries up to and including June 31st 2009 have been closed. The discussion continues on the new Land of Whimsy blog:
http://www.landofwhimsy.com
|
|
Back to...
|
|