Author: Ruben Bolling

THIS WEEK'S COMIC at Boing Boing: SUPER-FUN-PAK COMIX, featuring Percival Dunwoody, Darthfield and lots more!

 

I've been getting emails informing me that the Onion has done a video strikingly similar to a Tom the Dancing Bug comic.

 

This is their video, "White Girl Will Be Tried As Black Adult"

 

My comic, "White Woman To Be Tried As Black Man," which was in my book Thrilling Tales of Tom the Dancing Bug, was created so long ago, that last panel is actually a reference to the Ken Starr's ongoing investigation of Bill Clinton!

 

When I saw these amazing and fascinating designs, my jaw dropped.

 

From the website  2719 Hyperion, comes the story of how the Disney studio designed insignias for U.S. military units during World War II.  Check out the Jackson Air Base's cool insignia:

 

 

And this one was for the 2nd Reconnaissance Squadron:

 

 

A smiling mommy kangaroo raining down destruction for The 46th Bombardment Group:

 

 

Why was a dodo bird chosen for the 47th Schl. Squadron at Randolph Field, Texas?  Who cares; it's awesome!

 

 

There are many more on display on the website.  I love 'em all.  And here's a picture of one of the insignias in actions, on the PT-9 Mosquito Boat.

 

Click here to read PUNDIT NATE-TION

 

I should be happy about all the attention my comic got last week.  A piece about it written by Roger Ebert.  Tons of citations, blog posts and re-tweets, including one by Neil Gaiman.  Named comic of the day.  Named comic of the week. 

 

So it raises the question:  Should I be concerned that all this happened to the one Tom the Dancing Bug that I DIDN'T DRAW??!!

Hey, I got a thumbs-up from the Master!

 

Roger Ebert writes on his blog, "If you aren't a fan of Tom the Dancing Bug, I can only wonder, Why Not?"

THIS WEEK'S COMIC on Boing Boing: Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (Corrected to reflect modern sensibilities): 

Plus, note this comment I wrote in a Boing Boing post about the illustrations used in the comic:

"I had pencilled virtually this entire comic (Tom the Dancing Bug), trying to evoke the look of Kemble's illustrations, when I realized (in the shower, the day of my deadline) that instead of continuing to draw and ink the new pictures, I should just re-purpose the actual originals. Not only would I be sure to get the look exactly right (a dodgy proposition when I'm the illustrator), but it was absolutely more in keeping with the premise of the comic. Having the dialogue not quite work with the illustrations would only add to the humor/point of the comic. So I abandoned the pencilled comic (I've never done this before!) and set out to quickly assemble Kemble illustrations and lay the comic out. This took even more time than drawing the comic from scratch, but I like the results much better.

In researching Kemble's illustrations (I used that excellent University of Virginia site as a source), I saw that Twain had handpicked him, approved each drawing and ended up loving them. So subsequent editions that replaced or removed these illustrations were among the first steps taken by editors to change the book as Twain had intended it to be experienced."

 

 

 

 

Last year I wrote this comic about the persistent tendency of popular culture to put certain racial types into certain roles.

 

Now, I know the story of Rapunzel must have a virtuous girl with long blond hair (and I did love the movie), but did the villain really have to be the only person in the kingdom with ethnic features and kinky hair?

 

 

I loved this comment about this week's comic from a Boing Boing reader:

 

This is Russell's paradox.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_paradox

In this case, if the machine failed, then the situation would be ironic. But if the situation is ironic, then the machine worked. But if the machine worked, then the situation would not be ironic. So then it must have failed. But if it failed, then that's ironic, which would mean that the machine worked….

It's an infinite loop. The situation alternates (or waffles) between being ironic and not ironic. Unless there's a Wittgenstein waffle-head nearby, poor Donald P. Hotchkiss is in some serious trouble.

This seems to happen frequently in Tom the Dancing Bug. The comic takes a philosophical idea and makes it look totally absurd. And I never know, is the author making fun of the idea, or is he just making fun in general? Or is he making fun of his audience? Or is he making fun of the pinheads who waste their time thinking about these kinds of things? I get the sense that he's doing all of these things at once.

For example, after 60% of all Maltby strips, I have to sit there quietly (shivering) and ask myself, "Is this author making fun of me? How did he know that I do these things?" And that of course is a classic Maltby moment. As soon as you think, "Is this whole thing about me" then you are a fool just like Maltby. But if you're a fool like Maltby, then the comic is about you, and you're not a fool. It's the same paradox.

Welcome to the "bitterest of ironic situations". (And sorry for killing the joke.)

 

At least I enjoyed that far more than the first comment made, which was:  "I could swear Tom the Dancing Bug used to be funny.."  Oh, well, I can always reminisce about the good old days.

 

I had a great time last night watching Elliott Kalan's screening of "Little Murders" last night, with his guest, the film's screenwriter, Jules Feiffer.

 

Favorite moment:  Elliott's suggestion that if they open the program up to questions from the audience, before anyone raises his hand, he should think to himself, "Will this be interesting to the entire audience, or just to me?"  If the answer is "just to me," please don't raise your hand.  All Q&As would be immensely improved if this rule would followed.

 

"Little Murders" is a fascinating, daring movie, especially as an artifact of the times: the radical, anarchic late '60s and early '70s.  Jules's comments were terrific, speaking articulately about the political and social history/climate that led to his writing the play/movie.

 

On the pessimism in the movie, and in general, Jules said that things may be horrible and unsolvable, but we have to create and "maintain the illusion" that things can work, or nothing will ever get done.  Later, when Elliott asked if Jules would ever write another play or movie, Jules essentially replied that he can no longer "maintain the illusion" that what he writes could ever change anything, so it's time for "old farts like me" to get out of the way of writers/cartoonists who can still pretend that they can change the world.

 

A terrific program, entertainingly orchestrated by the always charming and well-groomed Elliott Kalan.