More Comics, Less Sports
Dear Steve:
Thanks for the encouragement to remain graphically
inept. I've always theorized that cartoonists' drawing styles tend to suit
their temperament in the same way that singers' voices reflect their own
messages. I mean, what if Johnny Lydon had wanted to become a lounge singer? Or
what if Jewel was one angry bitch with a bad hair day and a gun to use on any
guy she despised? So maybe my workaday "style" fits my cranky, as you put it,
outlook on life, I dunno. But I still would like to draw better, if for no
other reason but to like the way my stuff looks more when I see it in print.
Anyway, I suspect that maybe you're just trying to keep all the primo drawing
gigs with yourself ("And another thing, Rall can't draw for shit!" Brodner told
his editor over drinks at the 21 Club).
I'm glad you mentioned The
Simpsons , which is hands-down the best thing on TV ever. It's so great that
it's amazing that it was ever broadcast, much less promoted to the point that
it was permitted to gather an audience and eventually become successful. But
don't diss Fox--I thought Married ...
with Children (a live-action cartoon, really) was
pure genius. The X-Files , well, obviously is great,
though this business of preempting the season premiere in favor of baseball is
stupid. Why can't baseball games be played and broadcast during the middle of
the day, like in the old days? Any station that preempts news or other
prime-time programming for sports is irresponsible as hell. More to the point,
spectator sports don't deserve coverage in any newspaper so long as they're
cramming comics into one tiny page and skimping on the international coverage.
Why they merit TV coverage at all is beyond me, but running baseball games on
Sunday nights is sheer lunacy. Back to Matt Groening, I was initially
disappointed by Futurama , but now I realize that
it's not written for adults; it's really more for kids. The humor is more
downscale than The Simpsons , which is fine for its
intended audience. I guess I'd have to ask a kid whether they like it in order
for me to form a decent opinion.
I like your Phil Harris theory of sexual politics a lot.
It's true, you imagine that George Quincy is getting good sex--he certainly
appears relaxed for a guy who signs more death warrants for his state's
citizens in a day than I drink cups of coffee--but one wonders whether it's
with his wife. After what we've just been through post-Monica, I certainly hope
so. Speaking of which, I know it's a little late, but I'd just like to say that
I still think Clinton ought to have resigned the day in January 1998 that the
Lewinsky story broke, and definitive proof that I'm right was the sinking of
the test-ban treaty that you like so much. No sitting president would have
taken such a beating on a foreign-policy front without having lost all
political credibility to the extent that Bill Clinton did after being
impeached. He may have remained in office, but at what cost? He crippled Gore's
chances of defeating Bush--who as a Republican is destined to lead America into
its next recession or depression, as the GOP always does--and he squandered two
years of economic expansion during which really great programs might have been
enacted while we had the cash lying around. To those who say that private
consensual sex is nobody's business, they'd be right if not for the fact that
Clinton perjured himself under oath, which is obviously impeachable, and more
important, unforgivable. Anyone who's ever sat in a courtroom and watched some
dirtbag lie with a straight face knows of what I speak.
As for Clinton, it's not too late to quit--dash off that
letter to Albright now, for Chrissake!
If this is it for this week's Breakfast Table, Steve,
then it's been a pleasure solving the world's problems with you. And if this is
not it, see you tomorrow!
Very truly yours,
Ted
