By your command:

Artwork from Adventures Into the Unknown # 17 is believed by me to be in the public domain. Even if it is not, I claim Fair Use, witches!
26 Saturday May 2012
Posted in diary comic
By your command:

Artwork from Adventures Into the Unknown # 17 is believed by me to be in the public domain. Even if it is not, I claim Fair Use, witches!
24 Thursday May 2012
Quailman: his secret identity was Bob White.
King Cobra: I still like this name for a comic book character.
Golden Eagle: ditto. I mentioned this character in a letter that I sent to the lettercol of The Justice League, and a few months later, a character with the same name appeared therein. Coincidence? I think so, actually. But I like to think not …
The Power Pack: this was before Marvel’s Power Pack. Mine were a cross between the Fantastic Four and the X-Men. I mentioned these characters in a fan-letter I wrote to Jim Shooter and … well. You know.

Snowman: wore a parka. I think that that was his only discernible trait. Influenced by my dad’s tenure working as a welder on the Alaska Oil Pipeline during this time.
Lioness: I never actually made up any stories about her, but in the “Bullpen Bulletins” I wrote for the other comic books I made, I would always talk about what was happening in the latest issue of “The Lioness” — a one-sentence teaser for a story that I never intended to actually think through. “Lioness in ‘The Clutches of the Cog’!!!” Stuff like that.
Kitty-Cat: a cheesecake variation on the Lioness. I actually did write a Kitty-Cat story. My friend Bill Anderson (who went on to do some inks for Marvel in later years) drew it, and we submitted it to Charlton. Never heard back from them. The story was about drugs. I’d been reading Frank Miller’s Daredevil. Kitty-Cat referred to people as “scum” fairly often.
Galaxy Girls: a group of scantily-clad females who roamed the galaxy. I was heavily influenced by Heavy Metal at the time. Ironically enough, I already knew I was gay. Cheesecake appeared to me as just another genre, like superheroes or horror. I didn’t “get” the real reason behind it, I think, until much later.
Plaster-Man. This was a parody of Plastic Man (which was itself a parody). Ended up just being Plastic Man fanfic. My friend Ben Adams drew it until he decided, correctly, that we both could be spending our time doing better, more original things.
Etc.
02 Wednesday May 2012
Posted in personal
Tags
If you have G+ circles where you share stuff related to the following interests, please consider adding me to them, because I always want to see stuff relating to:
– comic books and graphic novels
– movies
– contemporary literary fiction
– fantasy & sf
– gay and lesbian politics and culture
– writing, esp. fiction writing
– historical and vintage photos
18 Wednesday Apr 2012
Posted in Louisville, personal
Tags
When you write something down in a notebook, then turn to the next page, you can sometimes see an imprint of what you wrote on the prior page, especially if you were bearing down pretty hard when you wrote what you wrote. Even if you throw away the written-on page, an attentive investigator can still read what you wrote, by looking for this imprint, or (as they say in the business) the palimpsest, on the underlying page. Palimpsest is one of my favorite words. It comes originally from scholars of ancient literature, who use this trick to, among other things, recover lost works, by looking for them in palimpsest form on the hand-illuminated pages of unlost works. In the modern era, a murder investigation can sometimes turn on a sticky-note palimpsest.
Palimpsests provide a handy metaphor for thinking about the way time works, especially the way that individual moments from the past can remain attached to a place. For example, there is a hill in Cherokee Park, here in Louisville, Kentucky, where I sometimes walk my dogs. The first time I came to this hill, there was a scary Public Works Administration era restroom at the top of it, an airless graffitied cinderblock square with broken-down, rusted toilet stalls and a leaky zinc urinal along one wall. The kind of place that is so gray that any sunlight that comes through any cracks in it looks pink, weirdly, against the gray. You’ve been in those kinds of places. You know what I’m talking about. That was the early nineties.
My boyfriend Joe told me that a gay guy had been killed in there once, when he was a kid, in the seventies. Other friends of Joe’s claim that that’s an urban myth. No matter. That murder, even if it never occurred, is a palimpsest for me. Every time I walk by that hill, I think of that murder in that restroom.
It happens, by the way, that that restroom is no longer there. In the early 00s, the city put up a beautiful, airy pavilion. That old, scary restroom still stands there in my mind, though, like an indentation in the air: it has become, along with the murder that may or may not have occurred within it, a palimpsest, too.
Hunter S. Thompson grew up near Cherokee Park, on Ransdell Street. I read somewhere that he used to go to Cherokee Park and have “hill parties” where he and his friends would burn tires in a bonfire. This hill, the one with the nice new veranda on it, the one with the palimpsests of the old restroom and the tentatively-historical murder, is the most likely candidate for such an activity. The hill I’m talking about is the centerpiece of Cherokee Park, a masterpiece of design, crafted by Frederick Law Olmstead, the same dude who designed Central Park in New York City. It’s also within easy walking distance of Hunter S. Thompson’s childhood home. That has to be the place. So Hunter S. Thompson and his tires and his fires and his childhood friends (and no doubt his drugs and his crazy-ass shenanigans) are another palimpsest that overlays the current reality of this hill.
I think of this stuff every time I walk my dogs there.
You collect these kinds of palimpsests when you stay in a place for a long time. They enrich your experience. I’m not just walking my dog on a hill. I’m thinking of a murder, and a scary old restroom, and a favorite writer, too. I’ve got a lot of palimpsests in Louisville, because I’ve stayed here a while. That’s a rare thing for me. Most of my life, I’ve moved around. I’m sure I’ve left behind many palimpsests in Denver, San Francisco, San Rafael, Portland (Maine, not Oregon), and everywhere else that I have lived. Russellville, Alabama, where I lived when I was a kid, is probably full of them (as are the nameless trailer parks we lived in when my dad was on a pipeline job — trailer parks, motels, campgrounds, etc., that I wouldn’t be able to find even if I looked for the rest of my life). I’m betting that these memories, in palimpsest form, would enrich my life if I ever reconnected with them. But I can’t, and they don’t, because I am never in those places, and to detect a palimpsest of place, you actually have to be there — otherwise there’s no way to feel the indentations in the aether. Many of those places probably don’t even exist anymore.
Is it better to stay in one place, and collect a bunch of palimpsests, a web of memories and connections and associations? Or is it better to throw yourself at random at the world, like a pinball in a pinball machine, like I did, forgetting half of the places you’ve ever lived, and the things you did when you were there — but making a lot of noise and having a lot of adventure?
12 Thursday Apr 2012
“Bearded” is a perfectly good and reputable English word, which describes a person with a beard. I approve of your use of this word. I find it informative and generally accurate. “Muscled” and “tanned” and “oiled” and so on — those all work without any awkwardness at all, too, because they are real words that mean real things.
But I’ll even go further than that. Farther? I’m trying to work with you here. You don’t always have to use real words. I’ll buy into “tatted,” for example, as a word to describe someone with tattoos, even though there is already a perfectly good English word in “tattooed.” I know and respect your needs as copywriters. Cutting out those two letters saved you some space on the back of a DVD. And ultimately your mission, your only purpose, is to catalog every possibly-fetishizable attribute of every actor/model who appears in your productions, so any space saved is space you can use to enumerate some other attribute, and another and another, possibly leading to just one more sale to one more creepy guy who likes — I don’t know, whatever it is that he likes. Whatever random thing. You never know what that thing is going to be. I get it.
But “glassed,” to describe someone who wears glasses, especially to describe nerdy gay boys with glasses, especially in the context of the phrase glassed twink is where I have to draw the line. Stop that. Immediately. It makes me feel sad for the world.
10 Tuesday Apr 2012
My dog Maxine does not like collies. She hates them, as a matter of fact. I think it’s their little needle noses. Maybe it’s their beady eyes, too close together, that kind of thing. She’s part border collie herself, according to the shelter where we got her. Maybe that’s the problem: self-hatred. Joe thinks it is possible that her collie relatives abused her when she was growing up. We will never know. All we know is that whenever she sees a collie of any sort — border collie, big fluffy Lassie-type collie, miniature “toy” collie, whatever — she attacks. She’s not this way with any other dog. Generally, she’s what you would call a “good dog,” if you met her. Unless you were a collie, or were with one.
Yesterday at the dog park, she attacked a miniature collie. Collies are fairly rare around here. It had been so long since this had happened, I didn’t realize it was her at first. I heard a dog fight break out, and kept playing “the Facebook” on my iPhone, because my dogs don’t fight. By the time I did realize it was her, the woman who brought the collies was holding Maxine by her hind legs, keeping her away from the cowering little collie.
I said the stupid thing that all dog owners say: “She never does that!”
The woman ignored me.
After I got Maxine onto her leash, the woman spent a great deal of time checking her dog for injuries. I stood there, just in case Maxine had left some damage, so that I could either defend my dog from an unfair accusation or deal with the consequences of a fair one.
After a while she said to her dog, “You’re okay, go play.”
When the woman stood back up, I smiled and said, “Sorry.”
She continued to ignore me. She walked away.
I don’t know what I think about that.
I’d rather she ignore me than be a crazy person haranguing me about something that was obviously a weirdness. Frankly, in Louisville, you’re much more likely to get some crazy redneck going on and on and on, screaming at you for something your dog did, so that was nice. She, too, obviously realized it was a weirdness, and didn’t try to make me feel guilty or bad in any other way, either. I appreciated the lack of drama, the efficiency of her dealing with the situation.
But, on the other hand, being completely ignored felt, well, un-Southern-ly. It was like I was back in Brooklyn, where people only deal with you if they have to, and only specifically on the matter at hand, out of necessity (because there are so many people, and so many matters, that there’s no way to account for them all in a single lifetime).
Maxine also hates squirting water, but that’s a story for another day. She either hates squirting water, or loves it, actually. It’s hard to tell.
09 Monday Apr 2012
Posted in diary comic
Tags
To be completely fair, the flight attendants were very apologetic about the lack of pretzels and cookies.
Also: I did not have to use a seatbelt extender, even on the tiny commuter jet! I normally don’t have to use one, but the last time I flew to Boston, I did (on one out of the four flights between Louisville and Boston). I was very happy that this humiliating circumstance did not re-occur.
Artwork is from Adventures into the Unknown # 8. It is my understanding that this artwork is in the public domain. Even if it is not, I claim Fair Use, passengers!
30 Friday Mar 2012
Posted in gay
It’s a fact of post-whatever blogging that the most interesting comments on a post are rarely made under the post itself. They happen in venues like Facebook and G+ and Twitter. My G+ friends in particular have been writing down some very interesting and subtle thoughts — many of them longer, and better written, than my actual posts — on the subject of men who have sex with other men. My G+ posts are all marked “public,” so you can go read those great comments, too, even if you don’t have a G+ account. See Jed and Tony’s comments here, for example. Some excerpts:
From Jed Alexander:
I think there’s value in distinguishing where desire comes from, in figuring out how certain kinds of sexual expression differ in their motivations, which is what I think you’re trying to do. At the same time, you’re also narrowing in further on the distinction of what gay is, and what gay isn’t. This is what I think is the root problem in mainstream gay culture, that what gay is must me identified and defined and institutionalized, but once again, we’re marginalizing people who don’t fit the definition in a way that also mirrors straight culture. In trying to gain acceptance from the dominant culture, as in straight culturem rather than promoting greater diversity in general, you also embrace some of the worst aspects of the dominant culture, the exclusion that marginalized gay culture in the first place. And that kind of sucks.
And from Tony Demetriou:
(And, of course, this whole topic totally ignores the current research on how humans make their decisions, where the difference between being “forced” to do something, or “choosing” to do it is pretty meaningless. We’re decision-making machines, that will make a decision based on the way we’re wired, and the input we’re given. Whether that “decision” was a “choice” or not doesn’t really mean anything, since “choice” is really a mental illusion that our brains hold. It’s like asking what “choices” this computer is making. It’s making “choices” that let it display this web browser to me. But they’re determinative “choices.” But I digress…)
My Facebook is not public, but there have been some interesting reactions over there as well. In particular, my friend Dale linked me to a Salon article by gay writer and porn star Conner Habib, Rest Stop Confidential, in which Habib describes the sex he frequently has with other men at Interestate rest areas. These two paragraphs seem to sum up some of what I have been trying to say:
This has been going on for a long, long time. The new ways that men meet — endlessly staring into phones, searching on hookup apps like Grindr or sites like Manhunt — haven’t changed the fact that we’re still having sex at rest areas, because they offer something different. For the man who is unsure of his sexuality, or unsure of how to tell others about it, for the man who has a family but feels new desires (or old, hidden ones) unfolding inside of him, the website and the phone apps are just too certain of themselves. They’re for gay men who want to have gay sex. Sex at the rest area, instead, abolishes identity; there’s a sort of freedom there to not be anything – instead, men just meet other men there; men who want the same sort of freedom.
Is it any wonder why people who feel the weight of their identities have been caught having sex at rest areas? Sen. Larry Craig and pop star George Michael were both discovered having sex at them. There is an appeal not just to having sex, but to having anonymous sex — not because you want to hide your identity from the other person; surely the other men recognized George Michael — but to feeling your own identity left behind. And this freedom is open to everyone, even those comfortable with their sexuality.
I don’t think this is the last time I will write on this subject, but I do think it’s the last time I will write on this subject for a little while. Feel free to comment, though, and write on the subject yourself — either down here under this post, or wherever you do your commenting!
28 Wednesday Mar 2012
Posted in gay
I am going to try again to straighten out (pardon the pun) my thoughts about male sexuality. Note, again, that I am only talking about male sexuality here, not because the other genders, non-genders, between-genders and gender combinations are uninteresting to me. But because that’s not what I’m talking about at this moment.
Here are some words we use to talk about the sexuality of men:
homosexual
heterosexual
Here are some other words we use:
gay
straight
My position is that the two sets of words are not exactly equivalent — that is to say, that “gay” is not exactly the same thing as “homosexual,” and “straight” is not exactly the same thing as “heterosexual.”
Before you jump down to the “comments” form, please allow me to elaborate.
“Homosexual” is a word that describes a specific activity, or a person who performs that activity (English can be sloppy like that — adjectives often step up and become nouns). When two men have sex with one another, that is a homosexual act. When one man engages solely (or almost solely, barring some experimentation) in sexual activities with other men, that man is a homosexual.
Likewise, when a man has sex with a woman, that is a heterosexual act. When a man engages solely (or almost solely, barring some experimentation) in sexual activities with women, that man is a heterosexual.
Unlike “homosexual” and “heterosexual,” which relate specifically to physical activities, the words “gay” and “straight” have cultural and aesthetic implications in addition to their sexual meanings.
Skinny jeans, stylish haircuts, and disco music — or any other number of random associations — might spring to mind when you hear the word “gay,” though strictly speaking these things have nothing to do with actual physical intercourse between men. As a social construct, “gay” points as much to non-sexual behaviors, choices, aesthetics, and attitudes as it does to actual sexual practice. Judy Garland. Lady Gaga. Elizabeth Taylor. “Gay icons” all — and none of them were men who have sex with other men.
“Straight” as a word used to describe heterosexual people started out, I think, in opposition to the word bent, which used to mean something similar to gay (with a slightly more perverse, self-hating edge). It has other meanings, when used to describe people, though they have been eclipsed.
For example, in the drug subculture, “straight” means “somebody who doesn’t do drugs.” I’ve actually had very confusing conversations on the street in San Francisco with people who were using “straight” to mean that, asking me if I was that (I am “straight” in that way). I kept saying, “No, I’m not straight,” and they kept offering me drugs, and I kept saying, “I don’t do drugs,” and they kept saying, “So are you straight?” It was like an Abbot and Costello routine.
“Straight” can mean somebody who doesn’t cheat at cards. “Straight” can mean a businessman who deals openly and honestly.
“Straight” implies steadfastness, conventionality, adherence to rules, and sincerity. It implies monogamy and marriage and sobriety and respect. It implies the missionary position.
The heterosexuality of a sultan with 47 female concubines and 2 male ones whom he never happens to use, or the heterosexuality of a pimp, or the heterosexuality of an Otaku who is “married” to a pillow in the shape of one of his favorite cartoon characters, are very different heterosexualities. The porn addict. The Slave to His Mistress. The furry.
There are all kinds of heterosexualities. Most of them don’t have names. Most of them are far, far, far from “straight.”
Likewise, there are all kinds of homosexualities, and all kinds of homosexuals, almost none of which, and almost none of whom, are “gay.”
I hope that helps.
Note: some of these thoughts came from talking to my friends on Facebook and Google+ — I’d name them, but given the subject matter, I’m not sure if they’d like to be named.
26 Monday Mar 2012
This is a story my dad told me when I was a kid. I do not know if it is true. It sounds like something he may have heard on one of the Vaudeville-esque radio shows that were popular when he himself was a kid.
I had wanted to send off for some mail-order “Get Rich Quick” scheme.
Dad said, “No.”
He said that when he was a kid, he saw an ad in a comic book that had a drawing of a guy in a top hat and a monocle, and a caption that said, “Send me one dollar bill and I will tell you how I made my millions!”
So he sent his dollar.
Six to eight weeks later, he received a letter from the top-hatted guy: “Thank you very much for your dollar. That is how I made my millions.”
Joe and I bought Kentucky MegaMillions lottery tickets this week. The booty is up to some crazy amount. Two hundred fifty or two hundred seventy or two hundred eighty million, three hundred million maybe, something like that. We always wait to buy tickets until it’s actually worth winning. The measly two or three million they start the cycle with isn’t enough to turn our heads.
Anyway. If we don’t win this time (I mean, Jesus, we’ve tried three times in a row now, WTF) I’ll be shocked, shocked, shocked.