Toonbots message board: So, I was reading my archives...

mouse Sat Oct 6 13:18:09 2001 what, you want _sense_? the world is full of things that make sense, and people that want you to make sense (while not holding themselves to the same standards), and situations that you have to acknowlege both sides of, because, well, the other viewpoint does make a certain amount of sense (if you look at things that way)..... so nonsense is a welcome relief. sheer silliness can brighten one's day in a really extraordinary way (why else do you think i keep a cat? - she's the silliest creature i've met). i also find toonbots a good exercise in breaking myself of expectations. i've always read comics, i read a number online, and most of my favorites do have things like, well, plot and artwork (or at least a regular schedule). but realistically (if you _want_ sense) the world does not guarantee you resolutions, beauty, or even regularity (in any sense of the world). so toonbots, in its nonsensical way, prepares me to better accept reality. perhaps i like it because it is an absurdist form of people-watching -- and a lot of the people is you, michael. i just cruised over the first couple - and, you remember that Dot was originally just a bit-map problem, spotted (and given meaning) by gopher? and then you turned around and integrated it into the whole toonbot concept! fascinating - gopher's search for meaning, your flexibility in coping with unexpected events.....if i actually believed psychology was a science, i could publish reams about you people. which brings us to the forum - a major attractor, i am sure, for those of us who post here -- it's really nice to post to a forum with few people, because one actually gets to know them (more people-watching!) - and somehow there seems to be greater selection for people who have something funny and/or interesting to say. (and who can spell.) and again, fascinating to watch the interplay between the forum and the toon - i guess other comics do respond to comments in their forums, but they seem to do it as more a sort of public opinion polling. toonbots is more sorta......architypal, or something. of course, the real reason i come is for the blurbs (i _have_ told you this before).

mouse Sat Oct 6 13:27:46 2001 speaking of sense..... how did i manage to post at the exact same time as you, when i was _responding_ to your post? i tell you, michael, you are just in some sort of alternate dimension.

Jenn Sat Oct 6 16:28:04 2001 Those wacky timezones > how did i manage to post at the exact same time as you, when i was > _responding_ to your post? Um, well, 12 hours later, but still cool that the post is /exactly/ twelve hours later. I read it for the ice cream.

Michael Sat Oct 6 16:34:49 2001 Re: Those wacky timezones > I read it for the ice cream. I'll have to include more ice cream, then.

mouse Sat Oct 6 17:53:42 2001 Re: Those wacky timezones > I'll have to include more ice cream, then. chocolate?

Eric Schissel Sat Oct 6 18:01:54 2001 Re: Those wacky timezones > chocolate? Or green tea'd be favorite, but an it please you, not - to stick to flavors which, so far as I know, have actually been, at some time, marketed...- chile con carne. Thanks, many.

Michael Sat Oct 6 20:35:05 2001 Re: Those wacky timezones > Or green tea'd be favorite, but an it please you, not - to stick to > flavors which, so far as I know, have actually been, at some time, > marketed...- chile con carne. Thanks, many. No, see, if I want chili con carne, I just *make* chili con carne (doesn't the country end with an 'e' but the dish with an 'i'?) Adding ice cream would make it ... less perfect. Chocolate. Really good, FUDGE chocolate.

Michael Sat Oct 6 16:33:51 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > how did i manage to post at the exact same time as you, when i was > _responding_ to your post? i tell you, michael, you are just in some sort > of alternate dimension. The "a" and "p" letters do look very similar, but I assure you they are semantically speaking diametrically opposed. In this context. mouse, thanks for the pep talk. See, during this daily sprint I've been doing, I kind of felt like there was a little continuity going on -- but rereading the archives from April on, I realized that this continuity was a pipe dream, a mere chimera, and frankly, as a toon (nonsense or not) Toonbots has room for a lot of improvement. Granted, for something some geek slaps out in ten minutes a day, I guess it's pretty good. I'd like to do better, though. If I knew how. It's this e-cartoonist mailing list I've been reading, I guess. It's made me start to look at my work as a "work" pertinent to "criticism" and other "double-quoted words". (My fingers are curled in the air, you just can't see them.)

Jenn Sat Oct 6 16:59:40 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... a) Who needs continuity? b) > it's pretty good. I'd like to do better, though. If I knew how. Well, I'd say that yearning to grow and change is honorable. But the question I'd have to bring up is...how are you going to do that? Certainly not by adhering to someone else's views on what makes a comic good. I think the way that toonbots has been growing is different than your average comic. If I was good at tossing big words around, I'd probably be tossing out existential or nihilist or dada-esque or something equally intellectual sounding. > It's this e-cartoonist mailing list I've been reading, I guess. It's made > me start to look at my work as a "work" pertinent to > "criticism" and other "double-quoted words". I also think one of the best ways to stymie your creative process is to get hung up on what other people (especially your peers) think about what you're doing. Do remember that artistic greats by and large struggle in obscurity, having to wait for humankind to catch up with their leaps and bounds above human existance. > (My fingers are curled in the air, you just can't see them.) Michael! I didn't know you felt that way about the forum! Oh. Wait.

Michael Sat Oct 6 17:09:20 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > a) Who needs continuity? Well. Not the Jihad, that's clear. > Certainly > not by adhering to someone else's views on what makes a comic good. Ah -- no. That would be jarring. No, Toonbots is, was, and ever shall be mostly for me (plus whoever else thinks it's worthwhile.) But *I* want to think about how to improve it. > If I was good at tossing big words around, I'd probably be > tossing out existential or nihilist or dada-esque or something equally > intellectual sounding. But see? You *did* toss out those words. If you hadn't qualified it, none of us would be the wiser. You have to stop double-guessing yourself. > I also think one of the best ways to stymie your creative process is to > get hung up on what other people (especially your peers) think about what > you're doing. I have no peers. I'm the only metacartoonist in the world. (See, however, http://tonyanddave.keenspace.com -- maybe I won't be alone for long!) > Do remember that artistic greats by and large struggle in obscurity, > having to wait for humankind to catch up with their leaps and bounds above > human existance. Ye-essss. I seeee. Yes, I like the way you're going with that....

mouse Sat Oct 6 18:45:16 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > No, Toonbots is, was, and ever shall be > mostly for me (plus whoever else thinks it's worthwhile.) But *I* want to > think about how to improve it. well, that's cool -- the toon-o-matic is _your_ artform, after all. seriously, as you say yourself, the toon-o-matic is the work of art - if you are reading e-cartoonists mailing lists, you are starting to worry about the by-product, not the artform itself. not that that's bad. art has two parts: the medium, and the message. in perfecting the toon-o-matic, you are perfecting the medium; if you are talking about "the work as the work" - i think you are drifting into the message end. and i've never really been convinced that critics have any particular right to comment on that. you (as a person) have a right to convey whatever message you want, and we, as an audience, can stay or go, depending on our personal opinion of your message. critics, it seems to me, are mostly there for people who are afraid of having opinions of their own. i actually know a number of actual professional artists; what is interesting to me is how much of _their_ thought is on perfecting the medium in which they work, as compared to the 'message' of the work - which is what most of the rest of us are thinking about when we look at the result. if you go to a gallery opening or a show, and talk to the artists, most of them are not expounding on what the thing 'means' - the ceramics people will talk about struggling with glazes, the neon guys are into the mechanics of single-electode/blown glass effects, and the brush painters are comparing swatches cut off unsuspecting animals, hoping to make the best brush. (i don't know any performance artists - they may be different.) i haven't thought this out thoroughly, but it strikes me that the _process_ is what makes art worthwhile _to_ _the_ _artist_ -- the struggle to reach the perfect technique, to most perfectly convey the message (whatever that is). this is what you are doing, in working on the toon-o-matic. and in fact, you _are_ the only one who can perfect it - because it is _your_ vision. everyone's vision is unique, but when you get right down to it, there aren't all that many messages. it ultimately comes down to what _you_ want to do. you've never suggested that you had any hopes of making a living off toonbots as such. you do it because you like tinkering with the thing; you show it off with cartoons because you have that sorta twisted mindset; and you are willing to share the results with those of us with similarly unhinged minds. if this makes you happy, what else about it really matters? you can make yourself crazy worrying about what other people think. (remind me to tell you sometime about George Ohr, the Mad Potter of Biloxi). it's fun to play with all the words - 'neorealism' and 'existentiallism' and all like that -- but there's no reason to take them to seriously. i think i was going somewhere with this, but i forgot where....... oh yeah - it's good that you'ld like to do better - it means you still see someplace new to go. (i always wonder - if you knew that you could do something _absolutely_ perfectly - would it actually be worth doing it? over and over again?) > I have no peers. I'm the only metacartoonist in the world. (See, however, > http://tonyanddave.keenspace.com -- maybe I won't be alone for long!) yeah, but he'll never match your blurbs.

Eric Schissel Sat Oct 6 18:58:59 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > oh yeah - it's good that you'ld like to do better - it means you still see > someplace new to go. (i always wonder - if you knew that you could do > something _absolutely_ perfectly - would it actually be worth doing it? > over and over again?) As I remember my semantics, 'perfect' means unimprovable as a thing of itself, not 'greatest'. (Speaking as ex-mathematician, which was my training, once... local maximum, not global.) One could have many different perfect things even within the same genre of art. Having found a perfect solution to a problem, if one doesn't want to find other problems, one finds... other perfect solutions to the problem. (I'm thinking of classical music as I write this, but then that's what I'm familiar with if I'm familiar with anything.) Having said/written that, I have no clue if I'm agreeing with you, disagreeing, adding, or rephrasing...

mouse Sat Oct 6 23:26:22 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > Having said/written that, I have no clue if I'm agreeing with you, > disagreeing, adding, or rephrasing... neither do i..... not totally sure if i would consistently agree with myself - as to perfect not equal to greatest - yeah, perfection (in the context of art, to me) is in the eye of the beholder, and most particularly, in the eye of the creator. 'greatest' you would need to rank on some external scale (i would think). so you could have 6 people make their favorite, 'perfect' brownie recipe, and they won't be the same. you could probably find a way to rank them, from greatest to least, but in the eyes of each cook, their batch is perfect. finding seperate, 'perfect' solutions, though, is i think the same thing i was saying - you find more interest in the process, the finding-of-the-solution - rather than just playing the same piece exactly the same way, over and over again (as it were).

Eric Schissel Sun Oct 7 07:59:29 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > neither do i..... > not totally sure if i would consistently agree with myself - > as to perfect not equal to greatest - yeah, perfection (in the context of > art, to me) is in the eye of the beholder, and most particularly, in the > eye of the creator. 'greatest' you would need to rank on some external > scale (i would think). so you could have 6 people make their favorite, > 'perfect' brownie recipe, and they won't be the same. you could probably > find a way to rank them, from greatest to least, but in the eyes of each > cook, their batch is perfect. > finding seperate, 'perfect' solutions, though, is i think the same thing i > was saying - you find more interest in the process, the > finding-of-the-solution - rather than just playing the same piece exactly > the same way, over and over again (as it were). A good point and quite true, I think. I was mulling over something quite different, for what it's worth and if anyone has the patience for a doubtfully relevant trip down memory lane... In my college days Tovey's 'Essays in Musical Analysis' were still in print and since among other reasons they at one point were considered part of the reading material of any would-be musician or music critic, and since they were easily accessible to me- probably more the latter reason, really- I read some of them. (I was a would-be mathematician at the time anyways... if somewhat career-conflicted.) He devotes one essay (I think most or all derive from program notes to concerts) to Mozart's 39th symphony, of which he remarks that the first movement, iirc, is 'perfect'. He clarifies that he does not mean that Mozart (let alone anyone else) never wrote a better solution to the problems posed by first-movement form; he clarifies that this particular piece is, on its own terms and in its own way, a masterpiece of its kind and unimprovable. Nothing could be done to it to make it better (in his opinion, anyways... for which he does give some reasons, mind!) It's fair to say that I've had that distinction in the back of my mind in the ten or so years since reading that.

Michael Sat Oct 6 20:42:29 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > and i've > never really been convinced that critics have any particular right to > comment on that. No, no, I think you're taking my trepidation too seriously. I'm on the e-cartoonist list because I like the people, and most of the talk is about silly stuff (e.g. chocolate pudding -- they are, after all, webtoonists) with the occasional foray into technique, most of which is useless to me. OTOH when they start talking about graphic design, I listen. And when they talk about story writing, I listen, because even though Toonbots doesn't really do the story thing per se, the Toon-o-Matic should. And during the crossover it was brought home to me that the Toon-o-Matic medium is still very constrained, as I keep repeating lately. I'm not worried about criticism of Toonbots -- anybody who does that *would* miss the point -- but I would like to try doing some more conventional cartoon-like things. Eventually. The build-your-own-face idea, now that has some possibilities. > it ultimately comes down to what _you_ want to do. you've never suggested > that you had any hopes of making a living off toonbots as such. HAHAHAHAHAHA! That's a good one! > oh yeah - it's good that you'ld like to do better - it means you still see > someplace new to go. (i always wonder - if you knew that you could do > something _absolutely_ perfectly - would it actually be worth doing it? > over and over again?) No. Boring. > yeah, but he'll never match your blurbs. Ha. No, what he's doing is not Toonbots. :-)

mouse Sat Oct 6 23:48:12 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > No, no, I think you're taking my trepidation too seriously. I'm on the > e-cartoonist list because I like the people, and most of the talk is about > silly stuff (e.g. chocolate pudding -- they are, after all, webtoonists) > with the occasional foray into technique, most of which is useless to me. ok - see, it wasn't real clear what you were reading about (and what makes you think chocolate pudding is silly?) > but I would like to try doing some more > conventional cartoon-like things. Eventually. The build-your-own-face > idea, now that has some possibilities. so we are still on perfecting the toon-o-matic -- which i am agreeing with, both as an activity, and as an end-as-itself. see, i was afraid you were starting to feel obligated to produce conventional results -- should have known better than to think that of a man who encourages people who hang out with metafictional wolverines, and throw each other out of windows. what was the original question?

Chris Sun Oct 7 23:45:05 2001 Re: speaking of sense..... > what was the original question? How many shades of nonexistent colors can hippopotamus a sofa? (Or was that a bit *too* original?)