--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "ShempMcGurk" <shempmcgurk@> wrote: > > > > An exceprt appeared in the New Yorker a few months ago. > > > > I was shocked in reading it. Why? Not because it seemed > > a satire but because it was so "straight" and very, very > > un-Crumb-like. > > Like most people in the world, you don't know > Robert Crumb at all. He's the straightest arrow > on Earth...doesn't drink, doesn't smoke, doesn't > do drugs. And the shyest person you've ever met.
The "straight" that I was referring to was absense of reference to sex, body parts (such as exhaggerated women's behinds and boobs), and racial stereotypes and racial epithets. And of course I don't know "Robert", Barry. He lives in France and I live in America with the other peons. > > > My immediate impression was that Crumb had become a born- > > again because the strip so adhered to orthodoxy Christianity. > > Didn't you even read the review? The book is the > text of Genesis -- all of it -- with literally > every scene illustrated. Never been done before. > > What was fascinating to watch is this guy you > characterize as only a satirist ...well, in addition to pornography of course...and comedy. > forming around > him a cadre of religious scholars and historians > to check his drawings for inaccuracies. And they > were there -- he had unconsciously drawn in things > that were anachronisms to the time, or clothing > that wouldn't have been worn in the times, only > much later in history. So he went back and changed > things. This book will be considered his "master- > work," although I don't think it is. That title > applies to some of the private-edition erotic > works. (Don't bother looking for them unless you > have several thousand dollars to spend.) This > book will sell for the normal price...he even > refused to let them sell a "limited-edition" > private (read expensive) version of it. Uh, I think you're making my point for me: that this work is quite unusual for Crumb. > > > So I am surprised by what is written in the article > > above because if the New Yorker excerpt is representative > > of the work as a whole, it is neither a satire nor a > > Crumb-like comic but more like the Classic Comics > > version of the Bible without any liberties taken. > > The difference is that the artists who did Classic > Comic books 1) weren't very good artists, 2) didn't > know their history or the periods of time they were > illustrating (or didn't care) and thus made it all > up, and 3) didn't have a real feel for the source > material, and a desire to bring it to life. > > Robert's work has been compared favorably to the > best artists in the world; his drawing style was > called by one noted art critic "Second to none, > and I include Breughel and Michaelangelo in that > statement." Get over Zap Comix, Shemp...Robert > did decades ago. > I find everything "Robert" did outside of his porno/Zap/satire/etc. stuff quite boring. I am referring to his countryside and village etchings (around France), his old Blues etchings, and now his Bible stuff. I only like his -- as you put it -- Zap stuff. I suppose I am an uneducated Rube, not as urbane and as sophisticated as you Barry, and don't know real "art". But I know what I like.
