Meet the Arseholes

[TC Raymond]

(Cue John Self's usual "that is syphillitic arsesplatter, you're a STAIN on this forum" CLANK, the thrumpet)

[Utter Shit]

Pre-empting someone's annoyed responses to your inane, self-indulgent threads doesn't make them any less relevant or truthful.

[sick as a pike]

I've been trying to think of a clever tag to do with Self Promotion, but couldn't.  Isn't this and the Boosh one just you advertising yourself?

edit:...er... you thlitoris

[TC Raymond]

I'm not advertising myself, just sharing my work, as it's unlikely to be published as a 'proper comic' until my cash flow situation improves appreciably.

[SOTS]

You should put all of them in one thread, TC.

[chocky909]

I'm not advertising myself, just sharing my work, as it's unlikely to be published as a 'proper comic' until my cash flow situation improves appreciably.

You're advertising yourself too though.

[Tokyo Sexwhale]

When is this strip supposed to be set?  Some of the references are contemporary, but the characters and clothes are archaic.

And can't you draw the kid looking embarrassed rather than have an exposition bubble telling us that he is, or indeed having so many of those bubbles that we don't even have to think about what you're trying to convey - i.e. "poor people are thick and don't like the things that I like."

[fanny splendid]

It's encouraging a response from John Self, which can only be a good thing.

[Cack Hen]

Hateful bile void of any charm or wit. Honestly, I found that quite depressing to read.

[Jemble Fred]

The references are certainly all over the place. Anyone who claimes to have gone to a cinema with a B-Film and a main feature would be more likely to be a grandparent now, not a parent. It's like a megamix of confused clichés.

[Small Man Big Horse]

The references are certainly all over the place. Anyone who claimes to have gone to a cinema with a B-Film and a main feature would be more likely to be a grandparent now, not a parent. It's like a megamix of confused clichés.

I agree with your sentiment about the piece, Jemble, though just to be picky I remember the days of a B-Film and a main feature and I'm only 33. And I'm not a parent or a grandparent. Though I've no idea what that's got to do with it.

To be a bit more constructive, TC, do you really feel this breaks any new ground? Isn't it the sort of thing that sub-Viz comics have trotted out time and again? And rather than attacking a target which is so easy to pick apart, why not go for something a bit more challenging? There were parts of your Family Guy strip that I enjoyed, but even then it felt too obvious - and rather than pastiche or parody, do you ever do original strips which don't reply on those types of humour?

[John Self]

<CLANK>


Well that's a brave and timely satire on a fascinating subject TC. A couple of minor quibbles though:

Contrary to what you say, I do know how to spell syphilitic: it's insulting to suggest otherwise. I have been to school, where I learned not only to read and write, but also to smoke and skive, to be rude to anyone who thought that being different automatically made them better, and to be... I don't know, a scared closet-case in denial (probably). Great days. Also, I'd never use a word like "arsesplatter": if I did, I'd stick a hyphen in there somewhere, because without it, there's a horrible ambiguity over pronunciation and meaning, people might think it's the kind of thing they could expect from a bumscarvery.


Oh, and as for 'Meet The Arseholes'- well yeah, I (unsurprisingly) agree with Cack Hen. Not much more to say than that. And chocky's right- you are advertising your work here. Not (I don't think) in a way which contravenes the rules of the boards, but be honest: you are.

Though, in the interests of being constructive, a few words about your use of phonetic speech. I've always found it (in text) to be a pretty difficult thing to pull off, a tricksy balancing-act perhaps not worth bothering with. Obviously, it's fun, as a writer, to jot down a normal English sentence and then mangle it up into whatever voice/locale/class you wish to convey, but it's really not as necessary as you seem to think. And of course, what's fun for the writer may not be for the audience, they might find it tiresome or wanky or just patronising: most people don't take well to that level of spoon-feeding. Phonetic speech often seems to me to be nothing more than the writer nudging me in the ribs and saying, "DO YOU SEE HOW I WRITE DOWN MY NOSE AT THEM? THEY ARE VILE AND THEY ARE COMMON! THEY'RE NOT EVEN FROM AROUND HERE!!!" Much more interesting, for both the writer and the reader, to reveal this through what they say, and how they think and appear- not as easy for the writer, but far more rewarding and less insulting for the reader. And when it comes to graphic art, it's even less necessary to bother with all this 'wot' bollocks.

(Incidentally, and this isn't directed at you TC, I think that anyone who writes, and uses the word 'wot' in dialogue, unironically, is not only a snobby git (that's not such a problem, for a writer), but less forgivably, someone who's not really looking at the words they're using. Just look at the words: "what" and "wot". Is there any way in which it's possible to correctly pronounce the word to make it sound more like the former than the latter? No, there's nhat.)

I mean, it's fairly obvious TC, how these people speak, from their appearance alone: where they come from, and how you feel about them, absolutely screams off the page, with the words being quite superfluous. I'm not saying get rid of the phonetic stuff entirely, just maybe try to reign it in a bit, stick to more selective, creative and interesting uses of it. (e.g., "Crorst-roads", which I thought was quite neat, even though it seemed massively out of character.)

Pre-empting someone's annoyed responses to your inane, self-indulgent threads doesn't make them any less relevant or truthful.

Yeah I was gonna say that. You off-topic, lying thlumbag.


</CLANK>

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I don't see what's wrong with him posting his stuff here if he wants to. It's not like we have 100 topics we have to think carefully about filling that are being wasted.

[rudi]

Where does the sneering stop and the funny start though?

And the irony of parodying someone who wants TV to be like the olden days is priceless...

[Tokyo Sexwhale]

Where does the sneering stop and the funny start though?

And the irony of parodying someone who wants TV to be like the olden days is priceless...

You know...I think the old boy might be the one you're supposed to be empathising with.

I think.  I mean I'm not sure, there isn't a bubble anywhere to explain it.

[rudi]

Really? Other than the "serious filmgoer" who is disgusted by the presence of poor people within his environs I fail to see how anyone else is depicted in anything other than a poor light.

And I meant the wife, anyway.

[hands cold, liver warm]

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Some of the facial expressions were impressive, good work. I was thinking the drawing style might limit that but you broke the shackles a bit with some of the drawings, which I liked.

[hands cold, liver warm]

thanks

[Neil]

You should give Munday's Chylde or someone a shout, and see if he fancies writing a script.  Cause  these are currently depressing rather than funny.  And I think they could be ace, if you got someone funny like Mundays _{or John Self} to do the writing.

[evelyn_blake]

You should give Munday's Chylde or someone a shout, and see if he fancies writing a script.  Cause  these are currently depressing rather than funny.  And I think they could be ace, if you got someone funny like Mundays _{or John Self} to do the writing.

What is it you don't find funny about it though? Because I agree with that 'Viz For Tories' tag down there- I find it slightly too reactionary to comfortably laugh at anything. I like TC Raymonds work but as this is coloured by his politics I only find the odd thing here and there funny. But getting in another writer woulden't remedy this if it's still venting TC's perspective.

  Although on re-reading your post it implies you dislike all his writing. I seem to remember TC posting a strip that someone else wrote which I thought was brilliant, I think it was TC anyway. Football hooligans supporting Art it was I believe.

EDIT: And here it is http://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=12873.msg608608#msg608608. Written by Nigel Buckland.

[Neil]

What is it you don't find funny about it though? Because I agree with that 'Viz For Tories' tag down there- I find it slightly too reactionary to comfortably laugh at anything. I like TC Raymonds work but as this is coloured by his politics I only find the odd thing here and there funny. But getting in another writer woulden't remedy this if it's still venting TC's perspective.

  Although on re-reading your post it implies you dislike all his writing. I seem to remember TC posting a strip that someone else wrote which I thought was brilliant, I think it was TC anyway. Football hooligans supporting Art it was I believe.

EDIT: And here it is http://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=12873.msg608608#msg608608. Written by Nigel Buckland.

I dunno if its the politics, don't think so - although I DO fucking hate people who use the word "chav" and sneer at those who are less priveleged than themselves.  I think its just that the strips are full of unremitting and fairly aimless misanthropy, and that's very wearing.   Tokyo Sexwhale is also absolutely correct about the bubbles; the one about the kid drinking from the straw struck me as being particularly unecessary.  That Buckland one was better, but Mundays or sick as a pike or someone could do a much better script.  Well, I really want to listen to R. Crumb and his Cheap Suit Serenaders now. 

[Hank_Kingsley]

The strips unfunniness isn't to do with the politics, I'm no leftwinger and I thought it a bleak and confusing mess. Anyway I don't believe TC is a Conservative (not, in my opinion, that there would be anything wrong if he was).
More scary misanthropic (i.e school shooter style) than funny misanthropic.

That said, I do like the artwork. S'nice.

[evelyn_blake]

The strips unfunniness isn't to do with the politics, I'm no leftwinger and I thought it a bleak and confusing mess. Anyway I don't believe TC is a Conservative (not, in my opinion, that there would be anything wrong if he was).
More scary misanthropic (i.e school shooter style) than funny misanthropic.

That said, I do like the artwork. S'nice.

I thought TC had categorically said he was a bit of a right winger? I read it through the gauze of that association. Theres nothing wrong with it of course but being as the whole strip is lampooning the lifestyles of a certain low-income persuasion traditionally thought of as loutish by a more respectable persuasion I can't help but read it thinking of TC shaking his head reproachfully. Not that the observations aren't majorly correct- I recognise a lot of that dialogue from conversations I overheard in my family, but the disdain of it dampened the humour.  Which I think is what you and Neil are saying with the misanthropy remarks. I think we're essentially of the same opinion, the root of it is misanthropy- I just have projected the right-wing views I think I heard TC  say he espouses onto it. If I'm wrong TC I apologise- I have no problem with you and only feel the need to point that out due to you suffering what I consider to be undue haranguing from other quarters.

The artwork is lovely though, on that I think we can all at least contort our faces into a 'I suppose' expression.

[Jemble Fred]

Argh! Sorry, TC, no offence, I wasn't going to say anything but I'm STAGGERED at the amount of people now who've said the artwork's anything less than okay-ish. It's great penmanship and shading etc, but the actual standard of cartooning and character design is utterly, utterly pedestrian. I could do better, and I don't rate myself as a cartoonist at all, I'm a scribbler. If this is good cartooning then alanstrang is the fucking Messiah of cartoonists (And he's not, he's just very, very good indeed).

[evelyn_blake]

Argh! Sorry, TC, no offence, I wasn't going to say anything but I'm STAGGERED at the amount of people now who've said the artwork's anything less than okay-ish. It's great penmanship and shading etc, but the actual standard of cartooning and character design is utterly, utterly pedestrian. I could do better, and I don't rate myself as a cartoonist at all, I'm a scribbler. If this is good cartooning then alanstrang is the fucking Messiah of cartoonists (And he's not, he's just very, very good indeed).

  Booooooooooooooooo!

[Jemble Fred]

Yes, well I feel rotten for saying so – it's alright, I wouldn't have been mean enough to criticise if so many people hadn't unaccountably overrated the artwork – presumably to make up for the way everyone's ripped the script apart.

Seriously, the shading and that is very professional – perhaps there's a great career for TC as a pen & ink man. The general composition's good too. But as an actual cartoonist? There's better character design in the likes of Zit and Smut!

Yes, boo. Sorry.

[Hank_Kingsley]

alan strang? who he?

I thought the character design was pretty solid, TC does grotesques pretty damn well I think.

[evelyn_blake]

http://www.youtube.com/user/pauldullson

Since I see no comedic reason for you to feign ignorance I will enlighten. Alan Strang is a (now) irregular poster. He's instrumental in the tumbleweeds and works with Lalla on things such as to be found on his Youtube page. He is, as Jemble says, very very good indeed.

[Hank_Kingsley]

Duly noted, cheers.