[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This was excellent!
Aaron McGruder
Reviewed by Nathan Rabin
November 23rd, 2005
In the sleepy, tranquil nursing home that is the daily comics page,
Aaron McGruder's The Boondocks is a scowling B-boy with a boombox blaring
Public Enemy. McGruder's strip, about two angry black kids who move into their
granddad's suburban home, has always divided readers. But after the Sept. 11
attacks, some of the strip's strongest criticism came from fans who accused
McGruder of abandoning the thematic and visual sophistication of the strip's
early days and turning it into a crude soapbox on which to fire direct shots at
the Bush administration. Admirers, meanwhile, hailed McGruder's more
confrontational direction, praising it as a vital source of dissent that
brought urgency back to comic strips.
For the past few years, McGruder has juggled the daily strip with
regular engagements on the lecture circuit and attempts to adapt The Boondocks
for television. The Boondocks finally hit the small screen as part of Cartoon
Network's cultishly adored Adult Swim block with both its confrontational,
hip-hop-derived sense of outrage and anime-inspired look intact. The A.V. Club
recently spoke with McGruder about being typecast as an angry guy, why the
American political system is hopelessly broken, and why being one of People
magazine's 50 Most Eligible Bachelors isn't all it's cracked up to be.
The A.V. Club: You've been developing this show for four or five years.
What took it so long to finally make it onto the air?
Aaron McGruder: I don't even know if it's that abnormal. Some shows
just take a really long time. In my case, it was just finding the right home.
We went around with several places over five or six years until the deal with
Sony happened, and then Fox and Adult Swim. But, you know, it was largely
creative-control issues.
AVC: What kind of creative-control issues?
AM: Well, just not having it. That's an issue. It's not the norm when
creators have any protections with regards to creative control. And so it took
some time, I think, for the strip to gain enough popularity where I had enough
leverage to come in and say, "It has to be done in a certain way or it's not
going to be done at all," and then have people willing to put up with that who
were ultimately paying for it. You know, for them to be willing to kind of
concede those kind of things. It just takes time, you know?
AVC: What happened with Fox, specifically?
AM: We did our best to do a Fox show, but, frankly, I don't think the
difficulties we had at Fox would be exclusive to Fox, I just think broadcast
television in general is a very restrictive place. It's tough to be funny,
because there's so many eyeballs and there's so much money at stake that I
think everything is just kind of over-thought. And it's tough to be daring and
do something different, either with regards to content or even structure. It's
really a rigid landscape. And you can honestly see it in the show.
AVC: How is the show as developed for Fox different than the Adult Swim
show?
AM: I think it's a different show. We did the best we could to do a
good Fox show for Fox, but obviously you're bound by the restrictions of Fox
and primetime and all of that. And so I think we tell a lot more interesting
stories and I think we do it in a more interesting way on a cable show. And
then, obviously, there's a million things we're allowed to say on late-night
cable that you're not allowed to say on a primetime broadcast.
AVC: Within the first minute and a half of the first episode I saw,
Huey talks about Jesus being a black man, Ronald Reagan being the devil, and
the government lying about Sept. 11. Kind of throwing down the gauntlet there,
eh?
AM: I think people were a little bit too concerned about what I would
or would not be allowed to say. So let me just get that out of the way and get
on to the business of telling, you know, a story, or two, or three, or 15. And
also to say, "Okay, look. Here it is, don't worry about it. The restrictions
and the watered-down and all the stuff that you thought was gonna happen
really isn't the case." So we done got that out the way, and now we can just
kind of move on.
AVC: On the show, Huey and Riley look and sound adorable. Do you think
you can get away with more because they're so cute?
AM: I think that's always been part of the thinking behind the script,
that-and I really tried really hard to impress that upon the staff of the
show, the animation staff-to try to get them to understand that we would only
be able to get away with what we were writing if the visuals were appealing
enough that it was like a balance, and even people who didn't like what they
were hearing would still not want to turn away because what they were seeing
was so nice. So that was kind of my hunch, and I think it worked. I'm hoping
it does.
AVC: What was the hardest part of adapting The Boondocks for
television?
AM: I think it was going from working completely by myself to working
with, not just a team of people, but really, several teams. Writers,
producers, the artists, the illustrators, the designers, and, you know,
overseas. I mean, it's small compared to what we would need to do the kind of
show that we tried to do, but even at small numbers it's way more people than
I'm used to working with.
AVC: Reginald Hudlin is one of the executive producers of The
Boondocks. What do you think he brings to your partnership?
AM: Uh, we don't have a partnership anymore. Reginald Hudlin left the
show at the end of the Fox pilot. He is now running BET, and I have not spoken
with him in over a year. We have a contractual obligation to give him a credit.
AVC: So what are you feeling angriest about these days?
AM: I'm actually kind of angriest about the fact that everybody keeps
saying how angry I am.
AVC: You feel like you're kind of pigeonholed in that respect?
AM: I do the interviews and then I read about myself. I understand it
and I get what it is. But there's so much stuff that I say, either jokingly or
lightheartedly, that gets printed like I'm dead serious. I'm kind of conscious
and aware of how ridiculous everyone involved with politics or talking about
politics, especially on television, is-all the shouting matches and the
screaming and the over-the-top personalities, and everyone's just playing.
It's like WWF for news, almost. It's really ridiculous and I really don't want
to be a part of it, and I'm not trying to put on this persona of this angry
revolutionary to get people to follow me.
I just tell jokes, and I think a lot of people take it too seriously.
It's not that I don't have things that I'm angry about in the world, and I
think most decent human beings are upset about things, and even upset about
things in their own country, but I'm not a particularly unhappy fellow. I
think I'm happy with the show, and I think it's funny and I'm optimistic about
it. What's on my mind, what's kind of bugging me, is clearly visible in the
strip and in the show, but I still manage to joke about it. [Laughs.] I really
get a little bit confused by all this "angry angry angry" talk when all I do
is tell jokes and at least some people find it funny.
AVC: Do you feel like the comic strip is a dying art form?
AM: Yeah, I've always felt that way. I felt that way when I got in it,
and I was fortunate that I was able to get in before it died. But I do think
comics are a dying art form because newspapers are a dying medium. But it's
not to say that in the next generation, where there's people getting their
news electronically, comics won't survive. Right now, they're still largely
attached to the newspaper world. And the more they can break away from that,
the more they have a chance to live on.
AVC: How do you feel about living in Los Angeles?
AM: I think there's a lot of good and bad to L.A. One of the things
you have to consider is that you can, if you're lucky, make a decent living
here. That's a big plus. That's pretty positive. The weather is OK. I don't
like the smog very much, but there are some days when L.A. is just very, very
beautiful. I hate the traffic, but I don't really commute very far, so that
doesn't bother me too much. The biggest thing that I don't like about L.A. is
the sort of 2 a.m. shutdown of everything. It really kind of stagnates the
nightlife. It's very hard to casually have fun in Los Angeles. If you want
to go out and have fun it's like a full-time job, you have to really prepare,
and call ahead, and get on a list, and know somebody... It's really rough to
relax here.
AVC: Right, right. Culturally, how do you feel about it?
AM: It may sound weird, but I don't really look for culture,
particularly in an American city. I went to Havana, and I was like, "Wow,
there's culture everywhere!" I don't think the American government has a lot
of respect for culture. That was one thing that I did notice when I went to
Cuba was that artists are paid to be artists, and poets are paid to be poets,
and musicians are paid to be musicians by the government. The government-and
I'm not saying that the Cuban government's perfect-but the government does
place a value on culture. Much more so than here, where culture is just a
matter of commerce. So, you know, I don't really look for that, and I don't
expect to find it in any city. You know, I'm not crazy impressed with New
York. I mean, I don't buy into that whole thing: Everyone in New York is all
sophisticated, and they're into art and sophisticated things, and everyone in
L.A. is just shallow entertainment people. I think people are just shallow
across the board.
AVC: You mentioned going to Havana. What was it like meeting Fidel
Castro?
AM: It was really cool. It's cool because it's Fidel, and it's a world
leader, and there's so much history behind the man and who he is in this
hemisphere. And then at the end of the day, he's, I think, just like a big
mayor. There's only, like, 11 million people in Cuba. He's a big mayor. He
just talked a long time, and he talked and he talked and he talked and he
talked... and he talked. I think it was about four hours. But I guess that's
part of the Castro spirit. But, you know, it was cool, and Cuba was
fantastic, at least just in terms of... Not to romanticize or glorify it, but
just seeing a place that had not really been touched by the hand of American
capitalism. Because it's a genuinely different place. A lot of times when you
travel, things start to feel the same from place to place to place, because the
same people own everything all around the world, you know?
AVC: It seems like the Republicans, as a party, are self-destructing,
yet people don't seem to be particularly angry about that. Why do you think
there's not more of a sense of outrage?
AM: I think because ultimately both parties share the guilt. And so I
think everyone's kind of just whistling and pretending everything's OK. At the
heart of this is the cover-up, and the misleading the country to war. And quite
honestly, I don't think they actually did a particularly good or sophisticated
job, but I think everybody wanted to be fooled. I remember being on the Bill
Maher show talking about how ridiculous this was before the invasion. And, you
know, a lot of people, even Democrats, had been so easily thrown into this fear
frenzy that they lost common sense. And now all of that is coming back on us,
and we've got 2000 soldiers dead, and if the 10-to-1 figure is true in terms of
injuries to deaths, there's probably been 20,000 injuries. And we found no
weapons.
And I just feel like the country is guilty. I think we should be
deeply ashamed for what we've done there, and we've gotta reconcile that, and
we've gotta find some way to make peace with this, and we can't do that until
we acknowledge what took place, and ultimately, I think that's the poison that
is killing this administration. And I think there's a lot of people in the
country who are guilty of allowing themselves to be duped in a very sloppy,
sloppy manner.
AVC: Do you think that Republicans have sort of lost their sense of
shame?
AM: They lost it some time ago. What's scary is when they lose their
sense of good planning. Like dude, you know, if you're gonna lie, really...
It's a big thing to fake your way into a war. Like, think it through. Do a
better job at the lie, if that's what it's gonna be. Do a better job-I mean,
whatever your goals were in invading Iraq, it couldn't have been this. This
can't be all part of some master plan. Something went wrong. Whether their
intentions are good or evil-I pretty much assume that they're evil-but no
matter what, man, when the people in charge make giant mistakes, everyone
suffers. Even if they do have good intentions, when you make giant mistakes,
it's a bad thing.
Well, if your intentions are already bad, and then you still make
giant mistakes, it seems like things just get worse. I get little joy seeing
this, because what I don't see is the public saying, "Wow, those guys are
really bad, maybe we should re-evaluate everything." I don't see that response
with the scandals, I don't see it with the indictments, I don't see it after
Katrina, I don't see the public going, "Wow, let's really re-examine the
entire direction this country is going." I read an article that pointed out
that the people that are probably gonna benefit most from this is, like,
McCain. And Powell. And like, you know, those kind of Republicans. But I don't
see the left really winning anything out of this.
AVC: What do you think the Democratic Party could do to become relevant
again?
AM: I think they need to disband. I think the two-party system is a
complete sham; I think it is designed so that the voters can feel like they
have the satisfaction of "throwing those bums out of office" every four to
eight years, but without the direction of the country ever significantly
changing. I think it's all a sham. That's not saying there's not a bunch of
good Democrats. I'm sure there's a lot of people who still haven't figured
that out yet or simply don't want to have that pessimistic of an outlook, but
I think the Democratic Party is completely worthless. We don't need a
two-party system. We need something else. Because at this point, the two-party
system is really just a one-party system. And that one party is crumbling. And
let's think about what that really means-there is no opposition party. And the
party that is in power is falling apart. Doesn't that kind of mean the
country's falling apart? I don't wanna be accused of being an alarmist, but if
there's nothing to replace the government with in terms of an opposition
party, and you see it all falling down around you, well doesn't that mean that
we're all kind of screwed? It kind of feels that way to me. And I'm pretty
worried about it, to be honest with you.
AVC: What could that "something else" be?
AM: I think we need... I don't know. Perhaps it's time to start
examining countries that have made democracy work while still having some kind
of the same relationship in covenant with their population. Perhaps we need to
look at the Scandinavian countries, or Canada, or something else, but whatever
we have now, I think we just have to acknowledge, ain't workin.
AVC: That reminds me of your, Kyle Baker, and Reginald Hudlin's graphic
novel Birth Of A Nation, where people actually secede. Can you ever see
something like that actually happening? Another American revolution? Or do you
think people are just too apathetic to feel one way or another?
AM: I think revolution is always a little bit possible. I think it
won't look or sound anything like what we would expect. But I think revolution
is very difficult, and I'm not optimistic for any kind of dramatic change. You
know, I think... I don't know what the future holds. It seems to be going in a
really bad, bad place really quickly, and I don't have the answers and I don't
have the solutions and I don't know what's gonna happen to change it. But the
continued apathy will only lead to a worse situation for everybody.
AVC: Did you vote for Nader in the last election?
AM: No. It was interesting, and I saw Nader shortly before the
election and-I voted him the time before, because I liked the sort of long-term
strategy of building a viable third party. So, okay, we'll get enough votes,
you get a little bit more money, and maybe, if there's continued growth, then
maybe eventually there's hope for a viable, legitimate third party. I think the
reason why I didn't vote for him last time was because we tried that and it
didn't work. Ralph Nader is a very smart guy, and I think he's got a lot of
good ideas...
I think, to a certain degree, they ignore the entertainment element of
politics. I think you have to play the game on every level. If you need a
friendly, charismatic, good-looking guy to be the mouthpiece, then so be it.
And maybe Nader should just be behind the scenes telling that guy what to say.
But I don't see the strategy. I see the heart being in the right place, and I
see the sophisticated thinking and the progressive thinking, and the desire to
do right for the world, and all of that is good, but I don't see the strategy
as to how they're gonna make those things happen. And I would really like to
see that again. And now, don't get me wrong, it definitely ain't the Democratic
Party either. They're so bad, I mean I'm actually starting to believe that
Kerry was just token resistance, that he literally was down with Bush. It was
just such a horrible, horrible, horrible thing to see, that campaign. So, you
know, I don't know what's going on. [Laughs.]
AVC: And it seems like an incredible paradox that all of Hollywood was
mobilized for Kerry, and yet they still did such a terrible job conveying
their message to the American people.
AM: You can call it a conspiracy theory, at this point I'm starting to
not even care... I guess I was a conspiracy theorist when I said "no weapons."
Now they call that history. Maybe he just threw the damn thing. I actually
don't even think Kerry lost, to be honest with you. Once I heard about the
electronic voting machines, and how they weren't gonna be audited, and no one
would be able to go in and verify what the votes were. And then the exit poll
thing-wasn't that kind of weird? How the exit polls didn't match up to the
voting... I feel like, you know, they dropped a couple lines of code in here
and there, and swung a couple states in their direction. When you're young you
say... Like, at least when I was young, in high school: "Eh, voting doesn't
mean nothing." You don't really know that to be true, you just say it. Then
you get older, and responsible, and you go, "Oh heck, let me vote." And then
you vote and you go away. I was actually right when I was 16.
Because it really doesn't mean anything. I wish I could say something
different, but I think it's kind of a sham.
AVC: Where would a change come?
AM: I think the people should demand accountability on the voting. I
think there's no point in voting if you're not gonna demand fairness and be
able to verify each vote. And other countries can do this fairly easily. So I
don't think you really want democracy if you're not willing to take that first
step. So when they come out and they go, "You can have all these electronic
voting machines, they're made by Bush supporters, and no, you can't verify what
the votes are," you don't really believe in democracy if you go and vote
under those conditions. You're just kind of wasting your time. So that's the
first thing, for people to actually value the vote itself before it's ever
gonna mean anything. But then... the population has to be educated about how
the government actually works. Anyone will acknowledge that there's a lot of
people other than those who are elected who run the government, and who are in
permanent positions, and long-term positions, appointed
positions-not voted in by anybody. That kind of gnaws away, I think, at the
idea of democracy. The two-party system, again, is an issue. What we see is no
desire on behalf of anyone to begin to address these problems.
But the flip-side is-and this is what I have to remind myself-I think
the population of the United States has been subjected to the most
sophisticated form of propaganda and mind control that any group of people has
been exposed to in a very, very long time. It's difficult for people in this
country to get any kind of factual information and to make intelligent
decisions based on them. And it's not difficult in the sense that the
information's hard to get, it's difficult in that it's hard to overcome what
you're getting beamed into your brain by the television every day. The
worthlessness of journalism today is just making the country confused and
bewildered and lost.
AVC: Do you think there's not a truly free press?
AM: Well, yeah. I mean, look at this Judith Miller thing. Isn't that
problematic? Like, she's getting fed information from the White House and
she's feeding it to her editors and then it's in the Times and then the people
at the White House can quote themselves? And it's the New York Times! And, you
know, I would have people laugh at me and go, "Yeah, do you really think the
government is calling the New York Times and the Washington Post and telling
them what to run?" Yes. [Laughs.] Yes I do.
AVC: You almost have a nostalgia for a time when the government was
better at deceiving people, and was better...
AM: Yeah, we call those the Clinton years.
AVC: Could you see yourself retiring from day-to-day cartooning anytime
soon?
AM: You know, I tell myself I'm gonna quit every week, but it's been
six years now. Not anytime soon, no. I think this year was probably more
difficult than it will be moving forward, now that the show is up and running
and set up. It won't be like starting from scratch again next year, so it'll
always be a challenge. It's always tough to fill that space every week. But,
for now, I'm trying to hold on to it as long as I can.
AVC: Are you still finding it satisfying as a creative outlet?
AM: Yeah, I think so. I think, ultimately, the problem with something
like this is that you actually have so many more opportunities to say something
than you actually have things worth saying. And then, as an artist who doesn't
want to do bad work, gosh, how do you fill up all that space when you really
don't have anything actually worthwhile to say? And that's what makes the job
tough, because the fans get mad-"That's not funny," or "You've been sucking
for several months now." And you go, "It's not my fault! I'm trying." When
there's things worth talking about is when it gets fun again, and when the
news is slow, or when there's just so many other responsibilities bearing down
on me that I don't have the time to do it right, that's when it gets
frustrating. As an artist, you just don't wanna put bad work out. So when you
have to do it seven days a week, you're just gonna have some bad days and bad
weeks and bad months and bad years. If I could just pick and
choose which days I did it, that'd be great. [Laughs.]
AVC: There was a long New Yorker piece about you a few years back. How
did you feel about it?
AM: That was awful. It was a really bad piece. And, you know, I'm not
gonna completely blame the New Yorker, but it just... It's one of those things
where you're like, "Man, I know how much time we spent together, and I know I
didn't come off like that." At the time, I was killing myself, trying to get
this pilot produced and maintain the strip. And I'm just trying to figure out
how to get it all done at once, when nobody can do it all. And it kind of made
it seem like I was really cavalier and lackadaisical about it, and just didn't
care. And that kind of bothered me. I don't remember grabbing myself at The
Nation dinner, but the writer wasn't there, and he didn't really, clearly let
people know he wasn't there. But it was a rough time for me, and I'm sure I
was... It's like I said, I can't blame the New Yorker as much as I'd like to,
but I do think it was a really kind of really kind of messed-up article. But
at least I looked good. And I got to meet Richard
Avedon, and that was a very cool thing.
AVC: What bothered you most about it?
AM: Well, like I said, I think it was the... At the end, I just kind
of felt like they made it seem like I just was really cavalier, and I just
didn't care about the strip. And I was just trying to figure any way possible
to get everything done, because there just wasn't really any help. At the time
it was just really, really hard on me. So, you know, it's all subjective. But I
think the New Yorker article actually just taught me a really good lesson,
which is-and now that I've been feeling stressed again, I'm reminded of
it-it's all... None of this is actually reality. This is all interpretations
of reality. You know, one writer's perspective, and you accept it for what it
is, and you have to keep all of that stuff-everything regarding celebrity-at
arm's length. Fame is not your friend. It ain't necessarily your enemy. It is
what it is. You're here, people look at you and point at you and ask a bunch
of questions, and then they'll move on to something else. And
that's kinda it.
AVC: How do you handle the pressure of doing both the show and the
strip?
AM: You collapse a few times, and you put your head in your hands, and
you say, "Oh my god, how am I gonna get through this?" You have a few of those
nights, and then you get over it and you keep it moving. And those nights...
As you get more used to the strain, I guess those nights are fewer and farther
between. So that's the best you can hope for. It's a tough job and it's a lot
to pull out of your brain. And then, on top of that, I think, being a public
figure-which, I have to admit, I guess I'm largely responsible for, in terms
of going out and putting myself out there-comes with its own burdens, and its
own things that cause you stress, and its own worries. So it's been an
interesting six years and I think I've learned a few things. But I'm glad I got
through it, that I got to this point. Because I'm happy with the show, I'm
really proud of what we've done, and I'm glad we made it this far.
AVC: So, speaking of being in the public eye, what was it like being
one of People's most eligible bachelors?
AM: What, in 2001? It didn't really do much for me. I thought I was
gonna, you know, be mobbed by women when I walked down the street, people would
go, "AAAAHHHHH!" and they would just run up to me screaming with their
magazines, and none of that happened. [Laughs.] It's a nice story to tell. I
used to try to use it to pick up chicks. That didn't even work. [Laughs.] So,
you know... It's weird, I mean... It's not bad, it's just kind of silly. It's
an ego boost for about five minutes, and then you think, "Man, I bet all the
other guys in the magazine are getting a bunch of chicks right now," and I'm
not. So, damn, maybe this is just another blow to my self-esteem. [Laughs.] "I
thought this would be a good thing. I thought I was gonna be Hugh Hefner,
man... I'm gonna have people lined up trying to get married and throwing their
panties at me," and... Nope, none of that.
AVC: But having your own television show couldn't hurt.
AM: Uh... No, I ain't running the streets chasing females... I'm all
out of that, got me a girlfriend, all settled and old. [Laughs.] Yeah, yeah,
yeah.
http://avclub.com/content/node/42840/print/
"If you could make a difference, what would you do?"...Said Kakese Dibinga
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
a.. Visit your group "scifinoir2" on the web.
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/LRMolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
