Usually this is a blog for figuring out storytelling aspects as I go, but I just had to share. Right now I'm throwing a pitch idea back and forth with the help of the awesome Cully Hamner (Red, The Question) about a Monkey's Paw-like substance that helps you achieve whatever makes you happy... or, as I should word this a little more carefully, whatever pleases you the most. Here is the pitch as I first sent it to Cully, back when it was extremely vague in my head:



Cully was unimpressed, and rightly so. He was, thankfully, very brutal, so I could see where I went wrong and how to improve it. He told me it sounded like the back of a book, and that I needed to be as specific as possible. Here are some of the questions he asked me about the story:



So I reworked it, keeping everything he told me in mind. Now it's in limbo once more, awaiting Cully's reply. Here's what it's evolved into:



I'll update on this the next time Cully tells me how bad this pitch is, but it answers the questions he posed. There are no longer nine people but a different ensemble, all of them looking for their heart's desires through Wormwood. They are compelled to pleasure themselves there because there is no other supplier for Wormwood, and it is addictive. When they go without Wormwood for too long, the effects fade and even get worse over time, so they have to be there to continue their prolonged happiness. The downward spiral towards madness becomes a spiral into addiction. The waitress, Elizabeth, no longer is unable to choose, mainly because Wormwood has no effect on her. And to what end? To destroy Wormwood and release the people she cares about from its grip!

More on Wormwood coming soon!

I've talked so much about story and its structure, I feel like I've neglected the other half of the comics I do--the art, and art direction. I prefer to create comics that have, as Scott McCloud defines them, interdependent art and words, where the pictures tell as much of the story as the dialogue and narration does, and each adds something to the other--a kind of synergy, where the two halves make a whole that is greater than the sum of their parts. Some people may feel that this kind of equal balance is the end-all be-all to comic book storytelling and is superior to the other forms of visual and narrative dynamics, but these days the people who tend to dictate which kind of storytelling is superior are the publishers.

I've had experience with just two publishers personally, but it is easy to guess their preferences based on the kinds of books they put out. Marvel, for instance, in the Stan Lee era, often had interdependent words and pictures mainly because of the way the artists and writers used to work together, the "Marvel style" where the writer would give the artist the basic plot of the book, the artist would go do it, and the writer would fill in the dialogue and narration where it was needed. Top Shelf's Chris Staros, on the other hand, looks for poeticism in a comic's words, and will take all kinds of artistic talent ranging from very sketchy to very sophisticated, as long as the story, dialogue, and narration are quality. Oni Comics's James Lucas Jones, on the other hand, is very much about the visual storytelling. In a lot of the books that Oni puts out, the art carries the weight of the story, and the text is supplemental.

As for actually talking about my own visual storytelling choices, I present to you Son of Babylon: Poor Kushi:




For page one, I really tried to stress the difference between what people say and what is shown. Specifically, on panels one and two I emphasized a mother and her child in the foreground as the speaker goes on about her poor baby boy. Then, as a contrast, I used a low shot in panel three to reveal Zer, who is neither little nor a child. Aiming the 'camera' from a low angle gives us a view from below of Zer, making him appear taller and more powerful, which can be used in a lot of different ways to tell story and show the dynamic between characters on a page.




Panel three on this page is an intimate, close shot that shows the closeness between Zer and his cow, Kushi. If this shot had been pulled out, you wouldn't feel the affection and intimacy that is present during a closer representation.




Panel two is all about repetition and tension. The knife at Kushi's neck is repeated twice, once in the main area of the panel and once in the shadows to the right. The shadows create a creeping feeling intensified by Zer's unsure expression reflected on the knife and gives the panel a will-he-or-won't-he feel. Panels four and five zoom out to imply the isolation of Zer and Kushi against the world, struggling against circumstance and convention that demands Kushi be killed. They're all alone in this, and the panels show that too.




Most of the panels on this page are good examples of how I try to consistently establish a fore, middle, and background. In panels one and two, while there is actual background, there are also three planes established by the characters involved. Panel two has the butcher in the foreground, Zer in the middleground, and Kushi in back, for instance. Three, five, and six all have two planes, with Kushi and one other person in the foreground and the remaining person in the background.




I'm still a little clumsy with my inking, but the last panel on this page showcases varying line weights to imply depth of field. The awning in the far foreground is inked with a bold, thick line, the two people in the middleground and Kushi are inked with a varying, not-as-thick line weight, and the circle of men and booths in the background are inked with a thin, dead line.




Panels one, two, and three again emphasize the exchange of power and dominance in the panel. As Zer loses credibility, he shrinks in the eyes of the taunting men, both figuratively and, in his head at least, literally, while the men grow larger and more demonic.



Of course, there is a lot more to these pages than just what I've mentioned--every panel on every page is the result of serious consideration and work, with thought put towards the dynamic and what I want to say, visually, to the reader without them even needing to read the words. The last thing I really want to point out is my use of a papyrus texture on the color burn setting, which adds to the old-time feel of the story and gives the shading some depth that would not have been there otherwise.

See you next time!

Let's talk about change. Change is what makes a story dynamic, interesting, and holds the reader. A stagnant story is of no interest, but one where the characters and situations are constantly changing can be fascinating. Now there's change on a grand scale--the story arc or the character arc--but what about change on a smaller scale, like from scene to scene? Things in scenes change all the time--the situation the protagonist is in, the dynamic between characters, the emotions, everything.
There is something called a "story value" that is the essence of change. While Robert Mckee defines it as "The universal qualities of human experience that may shift from positive to negative, or negative to positive, from one moment to the next."
Now what does this mean? Basically, it means that, to make a scene worthwhile, something has to change. Mckee is describing a sliding scale that can be between any two poles of human condition. It might look something like this:



Or this:



And throughout the scene, the characters will shift from end to end of the scale. Without change, Mckee says a scene becomes exposition, and even exposition can be done with something changing in the scene, thus making it more interesting to the reader. For example, here is what the opening page of Son of Babylon looks like as a thumbnail:



The thumbnail shows six panels of a caravan traveling into Babylon, showcasing Babylon's most recognizable landmarks, the Gates of Ishtar (panels 1&2) and the hanging gardens (panel 5) as my main character, Zerubbabel, narrates over top. Without the caravan to thread the panels together, it would be a series of meaningless establishing shots without interest, which unfortunately are commonplace in comic books, but what changes in this scene? From the visual standpoint, not a lot. However, the narration transforms it into a scene with a change in story value:



Now the sliding scale of story value goes from this:



To this:



And suddenly it becomes dynamic! From hopefulness (the positive) to hopelessness (the negative), you have a dynamic scene. It's exposition, yes, but it changes.

Now what about an actual scene between characters? Here is the following page:



Zer prepares for going to market by packing a bag. While he's indecisive about what to bring, he's still in the process of preparing. His little sister, Adina, restlessly moves about the background until she gets fed up and empties his bag out on the floor. While I'll go about explaining the hows and whys of my panel and story choices in a later entry, the important thing is that in this scene, interest is created by changing the story value from prepared to unprepared on Zer's part, and from verbal complaints to acting out by Adina.

Of course, not everything has to progress from the positive into the negative! It simply has to be a change, any change. It makes the scene worth telling.

More on change later.

There is a formula for everything, good and bad. There are formulas for good TV shows, formulas on how to pick up women, and the kind I'm discussing here--formulas for a story.

Now, just because you have a formula for a story doesn't mean you have to use it every time.

It doesn' t mean that all of the stories you write while using that formula will turn out the same.

It doesn't mean you should continue to use that same formula for your entire storytelling career.

A formula is, in its simplest terms, a crutch. You learn how to walk with its help but once you understand the theory and practice of walking and even running, you throw it away because otherwise you will become too dependent on it. Like any good mathematician, when you encounter a formula you wish to learn from, you need to understand the theory behind that formula.

This is the formula for a story--in this case, in screenplay format--that Syd Field, author of Screenplay: Foundations of Writing uses:



A little daunting, isn't it?

The way Syd Field breaks it down makes some sense of this diagram, but still leaves a lot to be desired. He says that the story is broken into three acts (though five acts are also possible, but we won't get into that here), each with a certain number of dramatic requirements to move the story along. Act I, the beginning, contains the set-up and Plot Point 1. Act II, the middle, has the confrontation(s) and Plot Point 2. Act III, the end, has the climax and the resolution.

Let's start with Act I. This should take up about one fifth of your story. Act I is where you establish the 'norm' for your characters and setting (the set-up), and Plot Point 1 is where you rip all that normalcy away. Plot Point 1 is the inciting incident--the thing that gets the rest of the story moving toward the climax. Syd Field says it changes the expectations of the reader, taking them in a direction that the set-up might not have implied was going to happen.

But wait, we can make this easier! Now that we know one-third of the formula, let's look at the theory behind it. Act I is all about exposition. Who are these characters, where are they, and what are they doing? But just giving exposition makes for no story--nothing happens. You are simply setting the scene; thus, the set-up. Now that you've settled your characters into their current situation, nothing is going to happen unless you push them forward with Plot Point I. In Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, Harry would have remained with the Dursleys forever if not for Hagrid telling him that he's a wizard--which not only changes the readers' idea of where the story is headed next, but Harry's as well. Harry's ten-chapter-long life with the Dursleys is the set-up, establishing what the reader accepts as the norm. The revelation about his wizardry is Plot Point I, or the inciting incident--it shakes up the norm and leads the protagonist, as well as the story, in a new direction.

For Act One, the questions you should be asking yourself are as follows.

What is "normal life" for my protagonist?

What incident changes their expectations of the future OR breaks them out of their routine?

Answer these two questions with a sentence or two each and you will have the bare bones of your Act I.

Act II is the bulk of your story. In The Hero With A Thousand Faces (a must-have for anyone who wants to better understand story structure), the hero's trials are commonly the part that takes up most of the monomyth, with the hero facing a more daunting task at every turn to prove his or her worth.

By the time you get to Act II, your protagonist has probably embarked on some sort of change, whether they're aware of it or not. The confrontations are obstacles laid in the path of that transition into a changed person. In Spirited Away, Chihiro (or Sen as she later becomes) begins as a very childish person, and is resistant to change--specifically, moving to a new home. After Plot Point One, when her parents are turned into pigs thus forcing her to go through the rest of the movie looking for a way out of their transformation, she begins to open herself to new possibilities that could solve the problem created in Plot Point One. The confrontations she faces are many--from Yubaba's attempts to trick her and make her seem like a foolish little girl at every turn, to Haku's mood swinging from helpful to icy in every other scene, to the enigmatic No-Face--and all of them, in one way or another, try to push her back towards who she once was, a girl unwilling to be open to new things. In most cases, her problems would be much more easily solved if she reverted back to the sour little girl she was in the opening scene and just gave up on trying new ways to escape the obstacles they place in her path. The thing is, the protagonist can fail in overcoming their confrontations, and sometimes they should.

Plot Point Two again spins the story around by taking it in an unexpected direction. In Two's case, what you as the storyteller are doing is forcing the protagonist's hand, putting them in a situation that directly leads to the climax. The unexpected outcome of Plot Point Two is the climax, so keep in mind ways you can manipulate the events so they all point towards the climax. Remember--your characters are not the storytellers. They are your tools through which to tell a story. Don't let them boss you around, and give them a situation they absolutely cannot say 'no' to.

So here are the questions you should be asking yourself for Act II:

How is my character changing? (it does not have to be something big)

What obstacles can I put in the way of my protagonist to encourage them not to change?

What can I do to make it so my protagonist has no choice but to face the climax?

Act III is the climax and confrontation. It will probably be as long as Act I. Act III is where the protagonist is faced with their greatest obstacle towards change--the climax--and chooses which action to take permanently--to change or not to change. The resolution can be short or long, but for a story to feel satisfying, there should be a resolution of some sort.

No matter how well the protagonist fared against the challenges seen in Act II, the climax in Act III is their time to shine and put everything they've learned to the test. In Star Wars IV: A New Hope, it is in trying to destroy the Death Star that Luke faces the climax and decision whether to change or not. He is forced into this climax because it is on an unstoppable course of destroying planets, and already the rebels have lost Alderaan. The destruction of Alderaan was the second plot point, the event that made the rebels desperate enough to go on a dangerous mission to stop the Death Star once and for all. With Vader hot on his tail, Luke, based on what he has learned throughout Act II, makes the fatal shot that explodes the Death Star. He changes--a character-specific plot point but not a story-related point point--when he embraces using the Force (that is an entirely different blog entry, though!).

The questions you should ask yourself about Act III should look a bit like these:

Does my climax tie into my protagonist changing (it doesn't have to)?

What happens after my climax, and how can I show that things are different now?


Of course there are many other questions you could ask yourself, and lots of information I've left out about such things as how to plot out a character arc or five-act stories and so on. There's a lot to cover, but that's why this blog is here!

No, not like that!

It started when I was a kid. You know how kids are--they write and draw for the sheer fun of it. They don't think about the artwork as a whole, and rarely finish what they started. That's the age where we all fall in love with art, that innocent puppy love that lets you believe you can get away with anything, as long as it's For The Art. That kind of unguided passion that lets you look at something hanging on a wall or sitting on a shelf and lets you smile to yourself. Yeah, you say, I can do that.

Creative masturbation is just that--art and story for the fun of it. There is no regard to the importance of the image or scene to the whole or if it even deserves to be included. As Pablo Picasso put it, "Art is the elimination of the unnecessary." There is a reason that we as an audience don't like long and rambling stories or overworked art pieces--because when it gets to the point where the creator is simply doing it because, oh, this scene/drawing/whatever is SO COOL! and for no other reason.

Now this definition, and the negative connotation I've put on it, may raise some eyebrows--after all, why do art if it's not fun? Of course art is fun! But the question you should be asking yourself is, how can I balance having fun with making a successful piece of art? There is no such thing as a hobby or profession without downsides. For instance, after having thrown myself headlong into the art world I find myself unable to have other hobbies other than practicing art. Why play bass when I could be improving my perspective, or learning how to tell a better story? There's also the inevitable misery that occasionally clouds my and everyone else's mind when it comes to the possibility that we've wasted our lives becoming artists instead of, say, doctors or that maybe we're just not good enough to make it in the art world. Dedication is taking the good with the bad and turning your weaknesses and insecurities into your greatest strengths.

The choice of structure--be it visual or story--over "just because it's cool" is what eliminating the unnecessary, or cutting down on your creative masturbation, is all about. Yes, showing those hundreds of wrinkles on your subject's jacket would make it freaking awesome, but is it really serving the greater purpose of the drawing? Is a scene with no other purpose but to showcase brilliant dialogue or a good joke really worth including if it makes the story unwieldy?

It's walking on a razor's edge, really. If you include every cool idea you have, you're going to have a monstrous final product that is going to have a hell of a time with corrections or edits because you love every stroke of the pen too much to cut anything out. On the other hand, something that is too streamlined brings up a whole other crop of problems.

Here's an example from my own experience. As I've been writing a historical fiction about the Babylonian captivity circa 500 BC, I've had to struggle with the shy romance between the main character, Zer, and the female lead Lilis. Here's my initial page number breakdown of a flirting scene:



That's fourteen pages of flirting! In my mind, of course, every panel was absolutely necessary to the process of them coming to know and like each other... but really, fourteen pages?

After going through my breakdowns and realizing I had to cut things down, I grudgingly said goodbye to my beloved fourteen pages and realized I could accomplish the same thing with this many pages:



That's right. One page.

But what about the other pages? Aren't pages 40 and 41 about flirting, too? No, they've been repurposed. 40 is to establish Lilis as someone who is a little headstrong and has her own ideas--and who isn't above a lie now and then. Those traits become integral to the plot later on in the story. 41 establishes how the Babylonian captivity of the Hebrews has colored Zer's opinion of the future and allows me to emphasize Zer's major problem throughout the story--he lacks confidence. Thus, his plans for the future are small if he even has any, and reflect the fact that he doesn't believe that he will ever rise to great things. Page 42, my single page of flirting, now accomplishes several tasks that again are important to setting up later aspects of the plot: Lilis is straightforward about what she wants while Zer is not. That's it! Thirteen pages written out and I know now what a smart move that was on my part. And think about it this way--this is my first book. If I still had a little trouble with something like visual storytelling or getting down the playful banter I had so wanted to showcase, would you be willing to sit through fourteen pages of awkward writing? Yeah, I thought not.

Creative masturbation is time-consuming with no constructive purpose, just like the real thing. Do yourself a favor and eliminate the unnecessary, just as Picasso said. You will thank yourself later... and besides, who wants to hold a pen when they've got hairy palms?

(in the butt)


But in all seriousness, I have ascended the first rung of the ladder towards getting published. James Lucas Jones from Oni Comics enjoyed my pitch and said it was a very interesting and original idea that hadn't been done before. He wants to see a synopsis and page breakdown from me now! Of course there's still a ways to go--Chris Schweizer said his experience started similarly but it took about 4 months to get the official okay on getting published. This will be a gradual easing into the comics pool, but by God I will get there and I will tell this damn story if it kills me!

Hooray!

<3

Apparently there is a group on facebook called "i hate zerubbabel and his temple." I was, naturally, shocked.

Me: Like, is this a club for anti-Semites or something?
Have these people even read Ezra?

Vid: dont take it so seriously, on facebook im a fan of swine flu >.>

Me: they seem pro-Herod though which is interesting
since you know HIS temple got torn down
that's right, take it suckas

Vid: lol

Me: who the fuck even knows how to spell zerubbabel right??

Vid: thats why its ironic

Me: No, it's just confusing

Vid: my guess, a religion major's inside joke
im joining the group

Me: NO
NO NO NO
ABSOLUTELY

Vid: rofl

Me: NOT
DON'T YOU FUCKING DARE
I WILL UNFRIEND YOU

Vid: you are amazing lol

Me: FUCK YOU
I LOVE ZERUBBABEL AND HIS TEMPLE TAKE THAT

Vid: that was worth every keystroke lol

Page three!

That's right, I have a website that, while it's still in the beginning stages and being modified, will eventually be home to my variety of comics including a weekly webcomic of Project Plastic! In the meantime, I will be working on a seven page sequence to submit to editors to see if I can get this Son of Babylon story out of my head and into print. Here's the first two pages!

Online is a shitty place to try and make or interpret jokes. Just today I couldn't tell whether my cousin's wife was kidding about moving around the country with her husband for the rest of her... whatever... then I had someone misinterpret something I said. Goddamn.

I have had this happen so many times when I try to talk to people online, and not just with jokes but about totally serious shit that they just happen to take in an offensive manner because they were in a pissy mood that day. The most common offender (defender? Defensive? (I DON'T KNOW WHICH WORD TO USE OR S/HE MIGHT BE EVEN MORE OFFENDED IF S/HE FOUND THIS ENTRY) of this doesn't read this blog so you don't have to wonder if it's you--it's not. But do I really have to clarify myself every time I say something by adding a three-paragraphs-long footnote at the end of every sentence? I screw up with what I mean to say often enough in meatspace (THIS IS A REFERENCE TO THE REAL WORLD AKA NOT THE INTERNET) that I make a fool of myself regularly; I don't need to compound on this by screwing up even more massively online. I drive enough people away just by being myself, geezus (THAT IS THE WAY OF SWEARING THAT MY MOTHER TAUGHT ME OKAY).

This sounds stupid, but I am so exhausted by this happening over and over again that this is going to bother me into not sleeping unless I pop a Valium. So thank you, internet, for screwing up what I say even more than when I say it in person.

God damn.

.

Since I've lately been binging on Biblical history, Professor Jessi (eyepatchmcgee for all you cool LJ folks who have friended her) discussing Hebrews chapter somethingsomething:

'there was a woman in charge of the hebrews
she was a judge
but it was cause there were no dudes willing to do it
then she was like "okay bob (i dont remember his real name) BOB! go forth and win this battle for God!"
and Bob's like "Bitch no! i'm scared"
and so The Judge lady was all "okay dickbag God just told me a womans gonna win this now to punish you"'




Awesome.

WIP.

So uh... it looks like I have a pretty good chance at winning one of the three awards.
You can see my entry at http://www.slgcomic.com/The-War-at-Ellsmere-Contest_ep_65-1.html
I'm entry 7, my dear friend Jessi's entry is number 8.

Inspired by my friend Jessi's entry, I decided to enter my own comic into the War at Ellsmere comic contest, and show it on my LJ the way she did. The contest is at http://slg-news.livejournal.com/290874.html
Dedicated to the wonderful Olu (the guy hugging me in the comic) for all his help in breaking me out of my shell!

My favorite uncle on my dad's side just died yesterday.

My mom's anniversary of death is tomorrow, but I'll sulk around on Thanksgiving too because that's also when she died.

My other favorite uncle on my dad's side died Christmas Day.

My dear friend's grandmother died on New Year's.

My grandfather died in January.


I'd appreciate a call, I'm having a hard time getting out of bed as it is. (404) 768-7429

Two pages I'm very happy with. Written Marvel-style by David Larrison, my best friend and housemate.






I really think I'm improving. :3

I've decided that A Fine Frenzy's "Hope for the Hopeless" is kind of the song of my life.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOSUvgNMuWA&feature=related

Stitch in your knitted brow
and you don't know how
you're gonna get it out
crushed under heavy chest
trying to catch your breath
but it always beats you by a step, all right now

making the best of it
playing the hand you get
you're not alone in this

there's hope for the hopeless
there's hope for the hopeless
there's hope

cold in a summer breeze
yeah, you're shivering
on your bended knee
still, when you're heart is sore
and the heavens pour
like a willow bending with the storm, you'll make it

running against the wind
playing the cards you get
something is bound to give

there's hope for the hopeless
there's hope for the hopeless
there's hope
there's hope
there's hope

there's hope