COMIC: Stardust
Neil Gaiman and Charles Vess
Vertigo/DC Comics - 1998
Stardust may or
may not be an actual "comic" depending on your definition. It's a
storybook, in prose, punctuated with paintings an illustrations, which
many people wouldn't consider or recognize to be comics, but according
to Scott McCloud's definition in Understanding Comics (see Sequential Smarts) it qualifies. Furthermore, both Gaiman and Vess made
their reputations in comics, and it's published by a comics publisher,
so there you have it.
Gaiman and Vess previously collaborated
on one of the standout stories from the Gaiman-penned Sandman comic
series, in which William Shakespeare encountered the denizens of the
realm of Faerie who would inspire A Midsummer Night's Dream. Gaiman
presented these characters as Shakespeare did (albeit in a somewhat
intensified form), as petty and meddling creatures who were bound to the
strict letter of their agreements, but who were more often motivated
by cruelty and self-interest. Stardust, while being an unrelated
project, feels like a return to, and expansion on that same
interpretation of "the lands beyond the fields we know."
Foremost,
and quite literally, Stardust is a fairy tale in the most traditional
sense. It maintains the sense of danger and the macabre that the
sanitized and Disneyfied fare we've become used to throughout the latter
half of the twentieth century. It's an adventure and a romance which
gives Gaiman another chance to explore these worlds through the eyes of
his characters, and leaves the reader wishing he would have explored it
even more.
Gaiman's strength has always been creating
fascinating worlds and telling stories within them, and he does that
here in satisfying fashion. What Gaiman, for my money, doesn't
do as well, is create interesting characters with sympathetic
motivations. Every one is an archetype who behaves accordingly,
providing no surprises and very little insight. In a book like this,
that isn't a fatal flaw, but the slim bit of development we do get from the principals just left me hungry for a larger helping. But that wasn't the thing that bothered me...
I've been reading Gaiman's comics for almost
as long as he's been writing them. I was one of the people who told
all the other people that they needed to be reading Sandman during its
original publication. More recently, however, he's been made a
name for himself as a writer of straight prose fiction. I've had more
than a couple friends ask if I've read his novels, and subsequently
question why not. Rereading Stardust, nearly 10 years after its
original publication, I'm reminded why I've avoided his other
work. While I enjoy his storytelling; free of the strictures of
traditional comics, I find his narrative voice to be overly affected.
While I have been assured that this is not the case with his other
writing, it took me a good quarter of the series (Stardust was initially
serialized as a 4 book series, and later collected into a single
volume) to get past it. Now I'm perfectly aware that this affectation
was deliberate, with the book intending to emulate the classic age of
Victorian fantasy writing, but it struck me as excessively
self-conscious.
Charles Vess' art has always been something of a mixed bag for me. He
is a masterful stylist and a skilled craftsman, but I've always found
his anatomy to be somewhat hit-or-miss. The faces of his characters are
often flat, with their eyes appearing too high, or the domes of their
skulls too shallow. With his more fanciful creatures, this is rarely a
problem, especially since many of them have grotesque, gnarled faces
with beakish noses that counter this effect, but for his barefaced human
(or nearly human) characters, I'm occasionally left with the echoes of a
high school crafts fair.
There are also places in Stardust where
Vess seems not to have been given -- or not to have read -- Gaiman's
text; where the textual descriptions (which frankly are a little more
specific than I found necessary in an illustrated book) don't match the
illustrations. More than once, the hair color described in the text
doesn't match the one shown. While this could be a result of palette
choices for a given scene, there's one in particular that isn't. In
Chapter 3, the text describes the dying Lord of Stormhold with his sons
gathered about him, the living on the right, and the dead on the left,
while the accompanying painting clearly shows the opposite arrangement.
Of course, most people aren't going to catch this, but it just seemed
to me to be symptomatic of the way that a stronger editorial hand could
have guided this to a stronger package.
All petty complaints
aside, however, Stardust is an enjoyable entertainment, and I would have
liked more of what both creators do well; more rollicking exploration
of the Realm of Faerie from Gaiman, and more big, beautiful paintings
(allowing for fewer of the less thrilling spot illustrations) of it from
Vess. It's for these reasons that I'm looking forward to the film
version, which will naturally be more visual, and less reliant on the
narrative voice.
Crosspost Classic! 08.14.2007
No comments:
Post a Comment