Q&A 9: McGraw/arcana
Thomas MacColl asks:
"Could the Brian x McGraw handymen crossover mooted in this week's comments ever really see the light of day? "
A serious answer: the Giant Days characters have to be handled with immense care in the context of the wider Scary Go Round universe. Remember, Lottie was 11 when we saw her in the last few issues of Giant Days, she's 19 now. Steeple is concurrent with that. For any of the central Giant Days cast to appear immediately jeopardises eight fertile years of potential stories.
"(Slightly) more seriously... you seem to go into some depth in your research/learning for the context of quite small details in your comics. Is this something you do out of personal passion, or a sense of duty, or do you find out interesting facts and then decide you should incorporate them into your comics? For example, both the recent 'kaffeost' and very recent toilet design details were things that turned out to be true facts where you could have just made something up or included less arcane information."
For a long time I would hear my comics described as "whimsical". I think this was largely because they were full of digressions on nonsense I made up on the spot. Then, around 2010, a friend (with no interest in my comics) with a sharp tongue cut up some rubbish I was spouting as "very whimsical". Hereby we can define two epochs: pre- and post-whimsy. I was already heading towards a post-whimsical world but after that cuss, the die was cast.
Since then I have been much more interested in incorporating fine detail that draws on research. I think there's merit in characters having very specific interests - interests which may not intersect with my own. I am quite a quick study and I enjoy looking into areas outside my experience. Used sparingly, I find specificity very funny (like the real-world toilet brands in Steeple).
Last week someone pointed out a podcast to me where an academic uses Giant Days as a good representation of archaeology depicted in media. I took the time back in 2016 to spend an hour or so reading up on digs, dig politics, the tools used, and someone noticed that I got at least a few things right. I find that very satisfying. If I get something wrong, or if someone perceives that I have got something wrong in one of my webcomics, I usually find out about it quite quickly.
The Spring Special story was a special case. I had written and roughed out a 32-page story and then found I couldn't draw it to my satisfaction, so I was forced to put together something new very quickly. I was drawing at times upon personal anecdotes or recent experiences. My French translator Diane told me that her sister lived in northern France "where they put cheese in their coffee", which lead me to look into a. whether she was pulling my leg and then b. where else cheese was being put into coffee. That lead to Lottie working at the coffee roastery.
The Snooker Plus material from Giant Days x Batman came from a throwaway comment one day from Nick Roche; looking it up on Wikipedia was a trove of inspiration.
I think readers like learning weird stuff from my comics. I hope so. Personally, I love learning weird stuff!
--
If you have a question you'd like to see answered, about art or writing or anything else creative, please ask - in the comments, via email, or a Patreon message.
Comments (11)
Count me among the readers who love learning weird stuff along with you. (Which is not to say that I don't have deep love for the older "whimsical" material.)
As someone who also loves learning weird stuff, I can say that I truly do appreciate the effort you put in. (And to be honest, I think it really does enhance the reading experience. I mean, you could have just made up some random snooker variant as the basis for a Batman villain (just for a random example), but using something based in reality just makes the whole thing seem even more absurd, in a good way. If that makes any sense.)
re: archaeological digs, dig politics The second part of what I jokingly refer to as "my career" was archaeological illustration (the first step was veterinary illustration, drawing dog brains, the insides of mice, etc.). I drew many maps of Native American burials. One day, I found a child mummy on my drawing table. No directions other than a note: "don't get water on the mummy."
Beautiful!
For me, it's always whenever train knowledge and jokes pop up that make me feel almost as if they are catered directly with me in mind, so the specifity of esoteric stuff in the stories is always appreciated.
Thanks John! I still think you could draw us a wee Brian x McGraw sketch strip though, and if Ronald or whoever point out the timeline discrepancy I'll tell him not to worry about it ;)
I suspect this is almost a secret of the trade. You could make up toilets, but it is much better to crib from reality. I think the Steyr-Puch Pinzgauer was the first thing I actually checked. I have used a Toto at work (without birdsong) and they are very wonderful creations. If you think 'there's no such thing' and look it up, you feel happy and smug to have discovered something. If you know it already, you have recognised an old friend. The sweet spot is perhaps about where 75% suspect it is real, and 25% know it is.
Now that was a good question with an interesting answer. Just the sort of question I could never think of.
I have often wondered how you keep straight all the various timelines in the Scary Go Round Universe. Do you prefer the classic wall of Post-It notes connected by pins and strings, or do you prefer the sleeker, more modern use of spreadsheets and Jira-based Gantt charts?
There's not too much to keep straight, thank goodness. Giant Days takes place between the end of Scary Go Round and the start of Bad Machinery. Secure in that knowledge, I can't go too far wrong.
Luv a bit of specificity