|
|
|
|
Peter Bagge, drawn by
Peter Bagge! All artwork
is © Peter Bagge! Used
with permission.
|
Buddy Bradley, star of
Peter Bagge's HATE
and hero to millions!
|
LOVE THAT HATE:
TWO-HANDED MAN INTERVIEWS PETER BAGGE
"Peter Bagge is the funniest cartoonist in existence.
"
-John Kricfalusi, creator of Ren & Stimpy
"American satirical cartooning at its most inventively
hilarious."
-Publishers Weekly
"HATE is the most hilariously depressing comic published
today!"
-Rob Zombie
Peter Bagge's first published
work appeared in 1980. Over the next few years, his work appeared in
various magazines like High Times, Screw, Swank, and, most significantly,
Weirdo, which was created and edited by Robert Crumb, history's finest
cartoonist. Bagge later became editor of Weirdo, and his hilarious strips
in Weirdo and subsequently in Neat Stuff magazine featured a motley
crue of hilarious and pathetic losers like Junior and Studs Kirby, the
unofficial `Voice of America,' but Buddy Bradley was the character Bagge
ended up sticking with, documenting his life from 1990-1998 in 30 issues
of a lovable comic called HATE. Over the years, Buddy muddled
through high school, moved from New Jersey to Seattle, got a girlfriend,
traded her in for his girlfriend's roommate, managed a grunge rock band,
moved back to New Jersey, opened up a store selling over-priced `collectables',
knocked up his girlfriend, married her, and scored for himself a
happy ending. Bagge documented Buddy's journey in a series of well-told
and impressively-structured stories that brim with some of the most
trenchant social commentary you could hope to find.
Two-Handed Man started
off our Nov 10, 2001 interview with Mr. Bagge by asking about Bagge's
memories of the times he spent working with Robert Crumb. Bagge referred
us to The Complete Crumb Volume 15, just published by Fantagraphics
books, which features a lengthy intro by Bagge where he deals with this
very question. (Fantagraphics also published all of Mr. Bagge's work.
Their website is www.fantagraphics.com.
All fifteen volumes of The Complete Crumb are, of course, essential
reading. To learn more about Crumb, rent the documentary CRUMB, directed
by Terry Zwigoff. )
Peter Bagge: ...but in a nutshell: He was
very kind and supportive towards me. I only have nice things to say
about him.
Two-Handed Man: Do you have a favourite
Crumb piece?
PB: Hmmm...from the early days, I loved
a comic he did called `Pete the Plumber.' It was very scatological,
but very up-beat and positive at the same time! More recently (well,
since 1980) I loved `Cave Wimp,' which appeared in an issue of ZAP and
hasn't appeared in a Complete Crumb yet. It `stars' Crumb as a caveman,
and is a very wise observation on the base instincts of human beings.
Yeah, I like everything he does.
THM: You're a big fan of Peanuts creator
Charles Schulz, but I don't seem to see any Schulz influence in HATE.
What do you like about him?
PB: Well,
from the late 1950's to about 1970 Schulz was the best cartoonist in
the world. I loved the way his characters interacted, especially Lucy,
Linus, and Charlie Brown. The ones starring those three were brilliant.
And I see a similarity (which sometimes borders on being a rip-off)
between those strips and many of my early comic strips. Girly Girl and
Chucky Boy were Lucy and Linus, basically.
THM: When I first saw your art, the only
guy it reminded me of was Basil Wolverton (an old-time cartoonist known
for his exaggerated grotesque style of caricature)...
PB: When I was younger I was simultaneously
attracted to and repulsed by Wolverton's work. After awhile I became
an unabashed fan of his drawings. But while I like his stories as well,
his writing was never much of an inspiration. I was more inspired by
Schulz, Crumb, and the MAD artists.
THM: Which MAD artists?
PB: I got into MAD in the mid-1960's (when
I was 8-12 years old, roughly), and my faves were Don Martin, Al Jaffee,
Paul Coker Jr. and Sergio Aragones.
THM: Were you into EC comix?
PB: I didn't read the old EC MADs until
I was in art school, at which point I became a huge Harvey Kurtzman
fan, as well as Will Elder.
THM: Did Marvel Comics have any impact
on you?
PB: I liked Jack Kirby's art, but I never
got into superhero comics as a kid. I liked the Batman and Superman
TV shows, but DC comics were very dry and dull to me, and with Marvel
I HATED that `to be continued' soap opera crap. I guess I just didn't
care enough to keep up!
THM: Your drawing style went through changes
over the years-what were you striving for with these changes?
PB: In the 80's I was still experimenting
like crazy, trying all these different approaches...with HATE I just
wanted it to look like a typical, unpretentious underground comic from
the late `60's-something that Crumb or Gilbert Shelton might have done.
THM: Those old pages seem like a lot of
work, not just in terms of all that cross-hatching, but each page is
pretty dense, with a lot of information in it.
PB: The cross-hatching was an easy way
to add `density' to each page, when in truth it was a pretty mindless
way to fill up the page. Still, I liked the way it made the pages look
`dirty.' That was what I was going for at the time. I wanted everything
to reflect the filthy bohemian lifestyle that is typical of a 20-something
male living on his own for the first time. When I think of my work habits
I tend to think of the artists and people I admire most, all of whom
spend days or WEEKS on a page. I spend about two days drawing a page,
which compared to mainstream artists is a long time, though compared
to most underground or alternative artists is pretty quick.
THM: From what I gather about the way Joe
Matt and Chester Brown work, making a page of comix their way sounds
really laborious, and not a lot of fun.
PB: Well, it's work, that's for sure. At
least if the end results are gonna be anything for anyone to get excited
about.
THM: How did the move from working to black
and white to working with colour make your job as an artist harder and/or
easier?
PB: My work habits generally remained the
same, but what I was going for stylistically changed drastically. The
basic art and stories in the colour HATEs were much more dense, intense
and personal than in the earlier HATEs. As a result, I kept the linework
cleaner and added colour to make it both easier to read AND digest.
Those colour HATEs were much sadder and complex than the earlier ones,
which basically were just Archie and Veronica/relationship nonsense.
THM: Hey, that's true. There was less of
a wild carnival atmosphere, but the stories had a lot more emotional
depth to them, as Buddy and Lisa got serious about making it work. And
the colour made it look less like an underground comic and more like
a nice classic Sunday strip.
PB: Yeah, the colour belied the content.
There was a bit of a contradiction there. I basically was doing what
Chris Ware (creator of the Acme Comics Library, published by Fantagraphics-THM)
became more celebrated for, which was combining traditional, iconographic
comic art and colours to tell rather grim subject matter.
THM: So the `friendlier' look that the
colour gave it helped the audience deal with material that was stronger
and more serious. Smart.
PB: I dunno how smart it was. I don't know
if people appreciated what I was trying to do, for the most part. Some
people did, but certainly not all.
THM: Maybe not on a conscious level, but
it works on the level of being a well-told story, and that's where it
counts.
PB: Those colour HATEs were the best things
I've ever done by far. I'm extremely proud of them. I seem to be better-known
and celebrated (if at all) for the early black and white HATEs, though.
THM: Yeah! It seemed like any time the
comic changed-moving Buddy from cool Seattle back to suburban New Jersey,
moving from black and white to colour-everybody was pissed, and called
you a sellout. Do you think it was just that readers were irate to see
their hero becoming less and less a mirror of themselves?
PB: You got me! The odd thing is this:
Buddy is always a reflection of where I was ten years ago. And for some
reason that went over really well when `Buddy' was in his early 20's,
but as `he' gets older comic readers become more resistant to him or
bored of him, which poses a lot of questions, such as:
1 Do my readers-or comix readers in general-simply move away from comix
as they get older? and
2 Do people simply not want to read about the adventures and concerns
of an older and more mature character?
THM: That's a real drag. There are all
these great comix waiting to be appreciated by adult readers, but I
guess it's a sad fact that most people do outgrow comix, like rock music.
And the funny thing about the slacker/gen-x hero label that gets slapped
on Buddy Bradley and your project in general is, it isn't true: in the
very first HATE story Buddy says he'd like to some day be his own boss
and run a small business, and he ends up doing just that! Even as his
friends are refusing to grow up.
PB: Right. The odd thing is that almost
all popular comix, alternative or otherwise, is that they're almost
always about either kids; or young, horny adults; or horribly socially
inept older adults. I defy you to name an exception!
THM: Why the hell is that?! Is there some
intrinsic flaw in the medium, or what? But yeah, Bruce Wayne's a psycho,
Peter Parker's a nerd...
PB: The odd thing for me is that I became
a happy, functioning adult in almost every way imaginable: I make good
dough, own a house, have a happy wife and kid, have no serious mental
problems, and basically am content with myself and my life!
THM: Congratulations! Are you the exception
that proves the rule?
PB: I don't know how exceptional I am.
I'd have to take a poll! But if that's the case, how can I possibly
do comix that reflect my own state of mind and still be regarded as
`alternative'? I think that older, stable and mature people outgrow
their need for fiction PERIOD. They're no longer searching for themselves
or `the truth' because they've already found it.
THM: Really? I never thought of that. Being
well-adjusted and stable and mature always just seemed kind of boring
to me. But then I wouldn't know, I've never tried it.
PB: In the form of fiction it tends to
be boring, though I'm not convinced that it needs to be boring. I still
feel the need to express the trials and tribulations of my day-to-day
existence, only fewer people seem to want to read about it. You can
still read all about middle-class and middle-aged concerns in the funny
pages, or in columns by Dave Barry or the late Erma Bombeck, only they
tend to trivialize what I'm going through in the same way that Archie
comics trivialize teenage life. There HAS to be a way to get across
what it is I want to say! I'm just not sure that comics are the appropriate
medium, based on who seemed to be reading them.
THM: It's hard to come to any conclusions
about what people want to read, because so many people who might like
it will never find out about it. I showed Joe Matt's stuff to my co-workers
who had never read comix before and they loved it, but if it wasn't
for me they'd never have known that stuff like that existed.
PB: What you just described is the #1 comix
fan's lament! But most people have an aversion to comix in general.
They seem like `work' to read, let alone search out and read.
THM: I guess some do, but a lot of people
I know would consider your stuff or Joe's stuff less `work' than reading
a straight novel.
PB: Yet many intelligent and well-read
people I know can't make heads or tails of ANY comic strip or comic
book.
THM: That's funny. Batman and Superman
are about as universal as you can get, while the medium that spawned
them is as esoteric as you can get.
PB: Right. Well, everyone knows who William
S. Burroughs is, but how many people have read his books?
THM: How far ahead did you have Buddy's
life planned out when you first started? Things like the re-appearance
of his childhood friend Tom after a 15(?) year absence suggest you had
a master plan from the beginning.
PB: No master plan...I usually have (or
had) a good idea of what will happen in the next few issues, but it
also changed a bit all the time. The basic story arc was in my mind
at all times, though.
THM: Why did Buddy pick Lisa over Valerie?
Val was smarter and prettier, and Lisa seemed to be actually insane,
most of the time.
PB: Val is just as insane. Val is violent!
She used to HIT Buddy! Lisa never hit Buddy. Val was much more controlling.
She had expectations of Buddy that didn't suit his character. While
Lisa had NO expectations of him.
THM: Lisa shaved her head and dressed in
a potato sack and chased Buddy around....
PB: Lisa was so in love with Buddy that
she was willing to make a complete fool of herself just to get his attention.
What's not to like about that?
THM: Why did Val end up with George? There
was never any sign that George had very much to offer. (Val was a `hottie,'
and George was a super-nerd who stayed in his bedroom all the time,
writing crank letters to the editors of OMNI magazine.)
PB: Val `ending up' with George seemed
more the result of their proximity, given that they were roommates at
the time. Who knows if they STAYED together? Who knows and who cares?
THM: Will the marriage of Buddy and Lisa
last? Have they got all that craziness out of their systems?
PB: You never know, but I'd say yes. Lisa
just senses that Buddy is her man, and Buddy has no reason to fight
it.
THM: Most of the HATE relationships seemed
to be built on dysfunctional co-dependence-Mom and Pops Bradley are
joined together more by habit than by affection-and yet the series ends
on a very optimistic note, despite the `cynical' tone Buddy and the
series are known for.
PB: Right. Well, what would be more obvious
or redundant than to have it end on a cynical, depressing note? As for
Mom and Pops-that's what happens to some degree in any long-term relationship.
It isn't necessarily a bad thing.
THM: Why do you think Buddy Bradley had
such better `legs' than your other characters, like Junior and Studs
Kirby? What made him work for you on a long-term basis?
PB: Buddy has more life to him because
he's much more autobiographical than the other characters you mentioned,
and because I age him.
THM: How autobiographical is he? I know
you both moved from the eastern U.S. to Seattle, but how much do you
draw on actual events for the details of his adventures?
PB: It's more my frame of mind than actual
events that I rely on to make Buddy `real' to me, though the latter
comes into play often enough as well.
THM: What are you up to these days? Are
you still hustling your ass for Hollywood?
PB: Ha ha! Well, I'm supposed to be working
on a pilot script for a tv show based on YEAH!, the comic I did for
DC with Gilbert Hernandez. I have no idea when that's gonna happen,
though.
THM: How enjoyable is that experience for
you, compared with just drawing by yourself?
PB: The business side of it is awful, but
once I'm writing (or drawing) on a potential tv show I have as much
`fun' as when I'm working at home by myself.
THM: Wasn't MTV going to make a HATE tv
show at one point?
PB: Yes, as was HBO. Both went nowhere,
however. Such is the nature of showbiz. Right now absolutely nothing
is happening with HATE, as far as Hollywood is concerned.
THM: In your essay that appeared in HATE
annual #1 about the 60's musical group The Hollies, you seem to go overboard.
Do you really think they're better than The Who?!
PB: Did I say that?
THM: I think you said The Who and The Kinks
were on one level, The Beach Boys and The Beatles were on a level above
that, and in some ways The Hollies beat them all.
PB: Up until 1968 the Hollies were far
more consistent, and produced a much larger quantity of listenable music.
The Who at their best are awe-inspiring and create life-altering music,
but they also produced a lot of self-indulgent slop.
THM: Do you like Quadrophenia?
PB: Quadrophenia has its moments, but most
of it is slop. That's when they started to lose it-especially Keith
Moon.
THM: So you'd say Who's Next is their finest
moment, and it was all downhill from there?
PB: Yeah. I like Who's Next, and I like
their early singles a lot, too.
THM: They have a record called Odds & Sods,
and you should get it if you don't already have it. It's great-lots
of funny bits, good arrangements...
PB: I have it. That was the LAST Who LP
I bought, way back when.
THM: Did you buy it when it first came
out?
PB: Yeah. I'm 43 years old! Almost 44!
THM: 43? What was the first record you
bought?
PB: `Do You Want To Know A Secret' by The
Beatles in 1964!
THM: Holy shit!
PB: Yeah, I'm old.
THM: I get the impression you're a bigger
Beatles fan than a Stones fan.
PB: Duh.
THM: The Stones always appealed to me more,
especially the Mick Taylor years (Exile On Main Street, Sticky Fingers),
and I HATE that wuss Paul McCartney.
PB: I was into the Stones for awhile, after
the Beatles broke up, basically. That ended when I saw them perform
live in 1972, however. PEE-YEW!
THM: What was wrong with the show? Aren't
they`The World's Greatest Rock And Roll Band'?
PB: They suck. Jagger can't sing, and the
rest are SUCH over-rated musicians. Mick Taylor is a big fat nothing.
Just another white boy playing the blues like a cunt. They're all a
bunch of over-hyped, ugly nigger wannabe cunts. No offense. And Paul
McCartney is the greatest musician that ever lived. Exile On Main Street
is the most over-rated LP in the history of the universe. McCartney
could rock out and play and sing a million times better than any of
the Stone EVER could. So he sang some corny tunes in his life, so what?
What about `Angie'? What about `Ruby Tuesday'?
THM: You don't like WINGS, do you?!
PB: I wasn't crazy about Wings, but they
made more good records in the 70's than the Stones did.
THM: Paul used his cute dopey persona to
get away with all sorts of mean power-tripping behaviour-John said The
Beatles broke up because he and George and Ringo `got tired of being
Paul's back-up band.'
PB: John Lennon is the biggest hypocrite
that ever lived! I love Lennon as a musician, but his and George's resentment
(read: jealousy) of Paul got the better of them. I'm amazed that people
bought into it for all these years!
THM: I think I'm missing something here-why
would those two be jealous of Paul?
PB: Because he was more popular and more
successful and a better musician and more prolific. The best guitarist
in The Beatles was Paul. The lead on `Taxman' was Paul.
THM: Really? But George wrote that...
PB: I know, but Paul played lead-the best
guitar solo ever! Paul was the most intellectually curious and the most
experimental. He was making backwards tapes and such way before the
others did. He knew Yoko years before John did! He loved the fine art
world back then-Lennon HATED it.
THM: I had no idea.
PB: McCartney gets SUCH a bum rap from
Lennon apologists, simply because they bought all of Lennon's lies.
Lennon did a hatchet job on Paul. Meanwhile, Yoko's still cashing the
checks John ' earned' from `Yesterday.'
THM: Hey! Paul made money from that Plastic
Ono Band record with `Mother' on it (published by Northern Songs) even
though he had nothing to do with it.
PB: Oh, yeah. I'm sure Paul made a killing
off of `Mother.'
THM: Um, touche.
PB: And at least he doesn't take
credit for writing it.
THM: I still love `Mother,' and all of
Lennon's solo stuff.
PB: I love `Mother' too. It was all downhill
for Lennon from there, though. I like most of his solo stuff okay musically,
but he became SO sanctimonious. The biggest phoney hypocrite rock star
`saint' ever.
THM: Hey, what about side 2 of Abbey Road?
All those bells and whistles are Paul's idea, and it stinks!
PB: I LOVE side 2 of Abbey Road!
THM: I think you're the only person I know
who likes side 2 of Abbey Road. I guess you're not a big fan of All
Things Must Pass (George's first solo record).
PB: I like All Things Must Pass. I like
all the Beatles.
THM: I think one of the very few songs
by Paul I'd listen to for fun is `You Won't See Me' on Rubber Soul.
PB: Paul McCartney wrote more great songs
than anyone who ever lived! He was amazing! In my opinion, anyway.
THM: This is wild! Paul is your favourite
Beatle?
PB: DUH! It's Paul, John, Ringo, and George,
in that order. Though like I said I like all of them musically.
THM: But his voice sounds so wimpy.
PB: Does he sound wimpy on `I'm Down'?
`Helter Skelter'? `Oh Darling'? I think his voice is amazing.
THM: John's vocal performance on `Mother'
is still tops, though. Back to HATE? You often used references to music
in your work as a storytelling-characterization tool. Studs Kirby's
perception of himself is undercut by his love for Doris Day and Brenda
Lee, and you know Buddy Bradley's getting old when his interest in music
wanes. I mean, in one of his very first strips he's in his bedroom with
his pal Tom listening to Toys In The Attic by Aerosmith, and a decade
and a half later ends up in Tom's living room, listening to Dwight Yoakum
and saying `Not bad'! Are there all the references to music just because
you were a music freak yourself, or did you consciously decide to put
a lot of pop culture references into your work?
PB: Hmmm....The references aren't some
deliberate plan on my part. Music is just a part of life, and what someone
might be listening to tells you where their mind is at in that given
moment.
THM: I know who Doris Day is because of
that Hitchcock movie she was in, but who was Brenda Lee? Did she sing
`Me And My Shadow'?
PB: Brenda Lee was a very young country
pop singer n the early 60's. She was massively popular. Had a tiny body
but a powerful, amazing voice. She did that song `I'm Sorry,' and `Rocking
Around The Christmas Tree.' You MUST have heard that one!
THM: I'm pretty sure the only time I've
heard of Brenda Lee besides your Studs Kirby strip is in that Golden
Earring song `Radar Love' where the guy says `radio playing some forgotten
song/Brenda Lee is coming on strong.' Wasn't there also a singer
named PEGGY Lee?
THM: Yes, she was a big band/`torch' singer
whose heyday was the `40's and `50's. `Fever' was her big hit. She and
Brenda Lee are very different singers, since Brenda started out singing
rockabilly in the late `50's before doing straight country pop, but
both were huge in their day. They're both excellent singers, too. Brenda
Lee has an incredible voice, especially when she was a teen. I'm amazed
that you don't know who either of them are!
THM: All the pop culture references in
your work really helped to hook me into it, and I think it is one of
its real strengths. It seems like there was some kind of literary snobbery
at work in the fiction-writing establishment---`tv, movies, and comix
are `lesser forms,' so let's never make any mention of them'-that made
their work seem, to me, phony and artifical and completely divorced
from the reality they were purportedly documenting. If you grew up in
the `70's, `80's or `90's, the tv was just always ON, it's a fact of
life, and your acknowledgement of pop culture's infection of every aspect
of life helped make your stories function so well as a sharply-observed
satirical history of America's last twenty years, from The A-Team and
Cosby to grunge and The Lion King. The references also helped to add
a layer of realism to the work, contrasting with the drawing style,
which was more about `cartooniness' and caricature than simulating visual
reality.
PB: As for the snobbery you mentioned,
one thing that writers and artists worry about is giving their work
`timelessness,' and if you make too many contemporary references that
tends to negatively impact the work's `immortality.'
THM: But with you it had such value in
terms of giving your work verisimilitude---it's like I can open a page
and know what year it was by what's blaring on the tv in the background!
PB: Now people complain about my pop cultural
referencing, saying the work feels dated in retrospect because of it.
THM: They're idiots! Voltaire's satire
isn't negated by the fact that he's satirizing specific people you're
unfamiliar with-if it's done well, the referencing is just a tool for
exploring/defining some element of human nature which is unchanging.
Like, what does the fact that a society chose to focus its attention
on this particular sort of thing, as opposed to some other thing, at
this particular point in its history, tell us about it? You know?
PB: I agree! Me and Voltaire are like THAT!
Seriously though, I try to not make understanding my stories depend
on getting some pop reference. But I agree with you.
*
Books by Peter Bagge: HATE vol. 1: Hey,
Buddy; HATE vol. 2: Buddy The Dreamer; HATE vol 3: Fun With Buddy &
Lisa; HATE vol. 4: Buddy Go Home!; HATE vol. 5: Buddy's Got Three Moms!;
HATE vol. 6: Buddy Bites The Bullet!; Studs Kirby, the Voice of America;
the Bradleys 1-5; Junior & Friends 1-5. All published by Fantagraphics,
please visit www.fantagraphics.com.
Please visit www.peterbagge.com.
All comix mentioned are also available through The Beguiling. Visit
their store in Toronto, or visit their website www.beguiling.com.
Peter Bagge is an exceptional story-teller and all of his stuff is highly
recommended, but when it comes to the Who's-your-favourite-Beatle question,
Mr. Bagge and Two-Handed Man will just have to agree to disagree.
Click here to read `Girl
Talk with Lisa & Valerie' by Peter Bagge
|
