Random Observations about Cartooning

With as much effort as I'm putting into this graphic novel the thought has occurred to me more than once, "Buy a computer soft ware art program for the finished product." It's not the $600 price tag that deters me, it's the learning curve. Drawing on a tablet just doesn't seem right to this old time ink-slinger. Yet, the colored pencils and colored markers I've been using look terrible. Granted, I'm knocking out talking heads at this point rather hastily simply to give the dialog a mouth from which to emanate. But the Platonic graphic novel in my head looks much better than the way Draft 5 looks on the screen or on hard copy.

I just finished page 33 (66 half pages). The changing background color is working for me....but I've yet to crack the following problems:

1. How do I help readers keep the many characters clear? At least I haven't given them Russian names. I actually haven't given them any names in the text yet. Do I add a "Cast of Characters" page? If so, up front or in an appendix? Or sprinkled throughout the text when they each make their first appearance?
2. Do I need a background? All those photos of the university class room may be pointless since the talking heads take up almost the whole panel. 
3. What will sustain readers' interest? It seems at this point only a very dedicated student of Ecclesiastes would stay focused. Everyone else's eyes will glaze over given the monotonous repetition of panels, layout, and talking heads.
4. Do I cite references, days, name of lecture? I do on the blog where I'm posting the rough draft (click HERE). But readers of the final product will not have access to additional factoids.
5. Is there a way I can leverage 2000 talking heads to my advantage? Rather than trying to break up the monotony with a sly inclusion of field trips, long shots, Power Point and lap top screen images (pretending that 2000 talking heads in a comic book is normal), maybe I can claim the talking heads as my raison d'etre. I'm not interested in changing the name Ecclesiastes University, but maybe I can add a tag line letting readers know I'm including 2000 talking heads on purpose, with artfulness, and with existential intention. Now to come up with such a tag line: 49 University Students Recoil from a Socratic Cattle Prod, Ancient Existentialism Unleashed on One Hundred Fertile Cerebrums, or, Be Glad I Didn't Draw Each Synapse. I'll keep working on it.

The pace of production is slow, slow, slow. But it's a zen-like, pleasant slow. I doodle alone in this big house sans five kids and loving wife. I'm somewhat astonished that I can sit in silence (apart from the melodic noise of our neighbors chickens and horses) for five hours scribbling, inking, scanning, and uploading. If I were under an editor's deadline I'd be in big trouble. But as it is I'm progressing at a pace that fits my work load, energy load, and interest load.

Which raises this important question: is there rhyme or reason to the ebb and flow of one's focus? For the first time since last December, earlier this week I spent two days not working on Ecclesiastes University. I wasn't depressed (I don't think), bored, or passionless about this project. I watched TV, Netflix, read good books, cleaned the house, washed clothes, went to work. But I couldn't muster the oomph to put lines on paper. If I knew what factors deterred me from productive labor I'd know what to avoid. 

That facial expression book I bought a while back is helpful. As are the reference photos I've been taking of hands, body language, etc. I don't draw from nothing; I use reference materials. 

I perused a collection of a reprinted newspaper comic strip called Foxtrot. It's consistently funny in 4 black and white panels. It's hard for me to be objective about my humor since my humor-o-meter is distracted with the other meters against which I am constantly measuring myself: philosophy, character development, drawing facial expressions, and many more. My First Readers are giving consistent feedback that my book is not funny and I believe them. It's in my mind to rework the dialog once I complete Draft Five: inserting jokes into a narrative flow will be easier than adjusting the narrative flow around the jokes. Or so I tell myself.

Detail, page 29

I cut and pasted friend Mark's old caricature here which is illustrative of the style of drawing I anticipate using in the final draft. It also demonstrates why I'm so unhappy with the rough cartoons I'm using in Draft Five. I'm working with drawings that are only weak approximations of what I envision the finished product to look like. But even with shaded caricatures like this I'm not sure good drawings are enough to sustain readers' attention. I'm zealous to write dialog that is sterling in its own right, the addition of well crafted drawings only adding value. 

No wonder my lawn gets mowed so infrequently...I'm obsessed with this project.

Ten Observations about Creativity and Distraction

Before launching a new blog where I'm posting the first rough draft to go public I wondered how that new endeavor might affect my creativity. Here's what I've learned.

1.  A significant portion of my brain is now hooked on feedback. Rather than blissfully creating with nary a care, I spend a considerable amount of time hoping for, anticipating, and wishing for feedback.

2.  Once I get that welcome feedback I then spend considerable time answering. Both wishing for and responding to feedback takes away from drawing.

3.  I also spend time integrating that feedback into the pages I've completed. That is, I'm now editing those first pages incorporating the great suggestions First Readers have offered. This too takes away time from penciling, inking, and posting that public rough draft.

4.  While I miss time away from drawing I must admit my ADD prone brain doesn't mind juggling all these disparate tasks. Part of the message of Ecclesiastes is that variety is the spice of life and engaging with the public over these doodles certainly adds variety.

5.  Knowing that I've now got followers on that other blog (I think about 10 of the 30 I invited) I feel additional motivation to keep on top of my self imposed posting schedule. I'm aiming for two posts per week. I'd like to do more but turning my latest rough draft into a printable rough draft is still agonizingly slow. I'm just trying to cram too much data (pencil layouts, character development, more tweaking of the dialog, inking, coloring) through too small a pipe (my brain).

6.  Posting this very rough draft feeds my sub personalities which are already prone to shame, embarrassment, and discouragement. The work in progress is a fool's errand. Each of the ingredients (humor, layout, facial expressions, section divisions, dialog, etc) are sub par and painful to read. Thus, a considerable amount of psychic time is spent fighting those self critical parts and pushing through the wall of resistance to accomplish the task at hand--illustrate the whole book of Ecclesiastes.

7.  I'm "forced" to continually dangle in front of my imagination the Platonic arch-type of a polished, finished, and honed final product. In my mind it "works." It's witty. It's unique. It's helpful. It's drawn to perfection. Readers get it. Theologians, philosophers, and depressed existentialists welcome it. This fantasy is shamed by reality--what I've posted so far falls way short of this ideal. It looks to me garish, confusing, halting, insipid, and the work of a deranged mind. Oh well. There is a perfect graphic novel based on Ecclesiastes in essence somewhere in the universe and my efforts will bring it into existence.

8.  I frame this psychic battle in positive terms. Moderating the internal debate builds character, strengthens synapses, and to be frank, is fun. Like the gambler whose dopamine neurotransmitters flow like Niagara when tossing dice, anticipating the finished product keeps my brain chemicals in a nearly constant state of mental bliss.

9.  Posting the rough draft reveals many new problems to be solved. How do I conquer the tedium of boring talking heads? How do I help readers distinguish one character from another? How do I color the thing so it looks pleasing and not so childish? How do I elevate the humor? Will the overall effect of student reactions bring clarity to readers' minds about matters of faith, existentialism, and suffering? When do I invite more First Readers? Should I invite more First Readers? These challenges distract me from the drawing task at hand but they are a pleasant distraction.

10.  Inviting a tiny slice of the public to evaluate these pages forces me to define success. If writing like Tina Fey is my goal, I've failed. If drawing like Herge is my goal, I've failed. If musing like Kierkegaard, Pascal, Dostoevsky is my goal, I've failed. If creating a work that goes viral is my goal, I've failed. If creating scenes, settings, and camera angles like Steven Spielberg is my goal, I've failed. If winning a Pulitzer like Art Spiegelman is my goal, I've failed. But if marshaling and merging dozens of tasks from my fevered brain to create a hefty existential comic book and having fun while doing so is my goal, I'm king of the hill, a gold medal winner, I get the yellow jersey, Heisman trophy, and lifetime membership in the hall of fame.

Why Do Brains Get Bored?

Occasionally I receive a catalog called Mental Floss. They sell witty tee-shirts, brain teasers, toys, and puzzles. Great stuff, actually. But I gotta be honest, the name Mental Floss makes me cringe. Why? I'm bored with it. As a pun it was cleaver when I first heard it years ago, but still? Vanity, vanity, all is vanity.

Maybe I've been jaded by the suggestion an art client once gave me--create a bumper sticker that says, "Mental Floss: Fighting Truth Decay." Cringe, cringe, cringe.

To re-calibrate my word-weary brain I gave myself the challenge to come up with a new twist on Dental Floss: Fighting Tooth Decay.  Here are the winners.

Gentle Floss: Fighting Booth Decay
Rental Floss: Fighting Sleuth Decay
Yentl Floss: Fighting Ruth Decay

These phrases make absolutely no sense but they serve one important purpose: they get my dulled synapses flowing again.

Which leads to these questions about boredom.

• Why does the brain not appreciate hearing the same pun 10 times in a row? 
• Why does repetition wear us down? 
• Is this what Dr. Q meant when he said the eyes are never full of seeing or ears full of hearing?
• What pleasant chemical reactions occur in the brain when finding rhymes for "dental?"
• Why are dumb new ideas more stimulating than old good ideas?
• How could a guy 2500 years ago experience boredom? I don't think of ancient folks as being enervated by brain fatigue like me.
• Does Dr. Q's lament, "there's nothing new under the sun" mean "the brain is never content and needs constant stimulation with novelty?"
• Why are traditions, routines, and "business as usual" so pleasurable in small doses? Pilgrimages to the sacred places, eating the same breakfast, and kissing your lover on New Year's Eve with confetti and Champaign is fun . . . but every day? No. We need routine but also variety. Why?
• If we knew the answer to the aforementioned question then what? Then I guess we'd better regulate our creative impulses.
• Why is anticipation so pleasurable? In Team of Rivals (Doris Kearns Goodwin) a politician is cited as opposing gambling because it over stimulates the brain. In How We Decide (Jonah Lehrer) explains that dopamine is released by the hope of winning, the thrill of the chase, and the calculated payoff to gambling. Half the fun of vacations and Christmas is looking forward to them. And the other half of the fun is reminiscing about them (hence the photo albums). 
• Reductionist thinking says this is all chemical. I like to think the mind is more than electro-chemical, neurology, and biophysics. Isn't there a little me in there somewhere (ghost in the machine) who delights in rhyming?

I've just about exhausted my mind dump on the subject of boredom and am getting bored. Time to go.

Time Travel

While spending many tedious hours this morning manipulating my mouse creating spiffier text boxes with a new and improved font (Draft 3), my mind wanders. What would my 18 year old self think if he were transported from 1970 to 2012 to observe the (nearly) 60 year old self he became? I imagine that younger me being an invisible ghost watching with dumbfounded awe at the old guy he became. I am so unlike what the young me imagined I'd be. Here's what I imagine the young me would write in his journal.

I ended up living alone? Yikes! What year is this? Where am I? Who the heck is this old guy? Where's his family? Is he not married? He has no dog? I loved my dogs growing up. And no guitar? No Beatles in the background? Why is he listening to Miles Davis? I hated Miles Davis in high school.


He stares at a flat box on his lap that glows. What the heck is that blue thing in his hand? Did the young me turn into a sorcerer? How can he do such magic? He rubs that blue thing on the couch cushion, clicking and clicking, and pictures on that lap thing change! Holy crap, what is happening?


Why isn't he working? It's 9:00 AM on a Friday and he sits in this living room hour after hour moving that blue thing around. Is his rich? How does he pay his bills? Where are Mom and Dad? The back yard is all green--trees, leaves, lawn, bushes. It looks like Washington State but I can't be sure. I never got to Australia like I hoped? Nuts!


I can see that he's working on a comic book. Well that looks familiar....some things never change. I used to sit in my room in silence and draw for hours and hours when I was 18, too. 


I see I grew facial hair. Where was that beard when I needed it? I would have killed to be able to grow a beard in high school. But the pot belly, gray hair, crows feet, and glasses make me look like the dorky adults that intimidated me as a teen. I'm actually astonished that I made it to 100 or however old that ancient me is. 


What's with that stack of books about Ecclesiastes doing on the coffee table? Did I become a religious fanatic? And why is he drinking coffee? I hated coffee as a teenager. 


Where are my buddies Jeff, Paul, John? I still can't figure out why nobody's around. Is he in some kind of jail? House arrest? Maybe the world ended like in Twilight Zone and he's the last guy on earth. I see a TV in the living room. Why isn't it on? I loved TV when I was in high school. I wonder if Gilligan ever got off the island. 

Words, Pictures, Talent, and Creating People

Since beginning this graphic novel last December I continue to puzzle over several questions: am I creating a book with pictures or adding pictures to words? Do I have the time (not to mention talent) to pull this off? How does one create cartoon characters with subtlety, complexity, and depth?

Here are my musings about these questions so far (in order).

Scott McCloud and Wil Eisner have probably described the significance of words influencing drawings, drawings influencing words, and the interplay between them. Rather than read other's opinions on this subject, however, I'm learning by doing. Currently my words are only slightly influenced by my sketchy thumbnails, doodles, and drawings. Someday soon I hope my finished words will be improved as I add pictures.

Jodi Bergsma said in my last post (and I misquote), "I'm too busy writing to read books about writing." If I were 20 I'd make the time. But I'm in a race against the clock and am relying on 60 years of reading and drawing to carry the day. I read recently, "A picture is worth a thousand words, but try saying that in a picture."

In How We Decide author Jonah Leher made an interesting observation. The chess computer that beat Gary Kasporov was a terrible back gammon player, and the computer that beat the world's leading back gammon player would lose at chess. Leher's point? Unlike computers that can do one thing very well, the human brain can do lots and lots of things reasonably well. I take comfort in this. I can't write, cast, act, direct, design, philosophize, do theology or psychology, draw, or tell jokes like pros, but I can do each of those things somewhat. The combination of these tasks is what'll make this graphic novel unique.

Finally, isn't "complex cartoon characters" an oxymoron? As I create the actors in this fictional drama I must choose how many layers of personality to give each one. Currently I've divided the cast into many, many uni-(not di- or tri-) mensional characters. One character loves money, one loves jokes, one loves sex, and one loves Jesus. One loves social justice and one loves scientific materialism. One is a feminist and one is a gun toting vet. One is an aging hippy enthralled with conspiracies and drugs; another is pre-law. On and on the list goes. I'm showing no restraint in creating characters. It's actually quite easy. God used dust, I use ink.

My problem from a literary point of view: how many characters is too many? This is a graphic, not Russian, novel. I want readers to care about a few likable characters rather than feeling overwhelmed by dozens of them. The cast of FRIENDS had six main characters with dozens of secondaries. Can I do the same? As is, I've got hundreds of secondary but no main characters. Combining several disparate traits into one person adds complexity and realism; we've all got sub-personalities. But can those characters come to life with all their multiplicity, layers and conflicting desires in a comic book?

We'll just have to wait and see. The process is sheer bliss.

Turn, Turn, Turn

I'm having problems with Chapter 3, "A time to be born, a time to die" (and 13 other couplets).  I've been wrestling with this text for three days and am frustrated. No matter which way I plan to illustrate it, it just doesn't feel right.

1.  Does the passage commend determinism ("there is a time determined for every event"), or prudence ("some times are better than others to engage in activities "). Based on 3:11 and 14, I opt for the former. I don't believe in determinism, but I believe that is the point of this long poem.

2.  If Mr. Q is describing an immutable providence behind birth and death and 26 other verbs, do I draw them schmaltzy and cute? Or raw like the rest of the book? Prudence tells me to draw baby bassinets and laughing children and peace signs and fighter jets. But then it won't fit with the tenor of the rest of the book.

3.  But if I draw baby Osama Bin Laden in a bassinet, planting of opium fields, and feeding Christians to the lions, I'm being true to Mr. Q's penchant for obscurity, absurdity, and depression. But then it won't fit with the tenor of pop culture and love of warm fuzzies.

The reason I'm choking is because I'm thinking too hard. Mr. Q's string of mostly benign actions could mean, "Here are some random things over which we have no control," but how do I draw those actions?

I'd love to use this photo as reference for a cartoony version of, "A time to embrace."

And then I'd like draw that nurse slapping the Navy man to illustrate, "A time to refrain from embracing."

But that "joke" is out of sync with the book of Ecclesiastes...as are the following.

"A time to cast away stones."

"A time to gather stones together."

"A time to plant" (which my aging hippy character would love):

"A time to uproot." (my aging hippy character will weep tears of sorrow).

"A time to mourn."

"A time to laugh."

Non of these images work for me. This is such a pivotal passage I gotta draw it right. One false move and I doom my graphic novel to kitsch-ville. If I nail it I could turn those 24 drawings into a poster.

How do I get unstuck? I just don't know.

The Challenge of Writing Humor

First the good news about writing humor. Unlike the stand up comic, extemporaneous quipper of bon mots, or off the cuff jester, humor writers have time to think, edit, and rewrite their material.


Now the bad news: how do we know what's funny? I sit alone in my living room, silent but for the sound of our gas fireplace, the neighbor's chickens, and Saturday morning traffic on the road by our house. I read a line from Ecclesiastes, imagine how a classroom of modern university students might respond, then search for a play on words, surprise twist, or witty conundrum which I hope readers will find cleaver if not outright humorous. I know my limitations and don't even try for hilarity, knee slapping guffaws, or belly laughs. Ecclesiastes isn't the right setting for prat falls, slapstick, squirting flowers or joy buzzers. My ambition is for readers to smile. Which, given the somber and gloomy tenor of the book, will be a great accomplishment. I'm aiming for gallows humor with heart. 


Here's a prime example of the difficulty of writing humor. I just completed writing the dialog for section 22 and the final verse (10:20) says this: "Do not revile the king even in your thoughts; or curse the rich in your bedroom because a bird of the air may carry your words, and a bird on the wing may report what you say." 


These words beg for comic treatment. Here's what I've done; let's see if it still has merit after it marinates several weeks (I'll do the second edit once the first draft is done). Bear with me; dissecting humor is, Mark Twain said, like dissecting a frog.


Section 22, Page 22


Panel 1: Mr. Q, Do not revile the king.
Panel 2: Student, There goes talk radio.
Panel 3: Student, There goes punditry.
Panel 4: Student, There go editorials, blogs, and satirical parodies of pomposity.
Panel 5: Student, Just when incivility is becoming an art form Mr. Q squashes it.
Panel 6: Student, Political party pooper.

Mr. Q's comment, like most of his comments, crash against 21st century life. On this page I'm trying to point out how difficult it would be to follow his advice to "not revile a king." The conventional interpretation of this verse among many religious folks, "Don't badmouth the president," a sentiment with which I generally concur (due more to my conciliatory nature than any theological or political conviction). I enjoy Steven Colbert, Bill Maher, and John Stewart. And I defend their first amendment right to make jokes about politicians. But my point on page 22 is to use the students as foil and call attention to the difficulty of following Mr. Q's command. Blending two phrases ("political party" and "party pooper") is the sort of word play I enjoy.

Section 22, Page 23

Panel 1: Mr. Q, Even in your thoughts.

Panel 2: Student, I can’t question political leaders even in my mind?

Panel 3: Student, There goes freedom of thought.

Panel 4: Student, (deep in concentration)

Panel 5: Student 2, What are you doing? 

Panel 6: Student, Tear gassing the protesters in my mind.

Reviling the king (or president) is important in a democracy (even though I sometimes cringe at the lack of civility, gravitas, and respect due hard working, civic minded, public servants). But I do not agree with this statement at all. I'm sure Mr. Q meant well...but c'mon. We can't even think about criticizing the government? I do not concur. Hopefully this comes across in a gentle (and witty?) way. (NOTE: I am doing my best not to lock my graphic novel in time and space by naming current events, an increasingly difficult challenge in this year of presidential election, national discombobulation, and economic woes. Political tensions are at a fever pitch and I'm so tempted to jump into the fray...but I want Ecclesiastes U to transcend the year 2012).

Section 22, Page 24

Panel 1: Mr. Q, Or curse the rich in your bedroom.

Panel 2: Student, If I want to curse the rich in my bedroom I will.

Panel 3: Student (looking like Groucho Marx), How they got in my bedroom I’ll never know.

Panel 4: Student, Those without bedrooms curse me because I’m richer than them and I don’t care.

Panel 5: Student, Cursing is a spectator sport.

Panel 6: Student, I wonder who the 1% of the world’s richest people curse.

One of the current events I'm avoiding mentioning in this book is the Occupy Wall Street movement, where protesters, saying they represent 99% of the population, are asking the richest 1% to pay more taxes. Amid this dialog has erupted a real anger toward the super rich. I do not share that anger. Rather than embroil these students in that debate I riff on the "curse" theme. The student dialog in Panel 4 is as close as I get to declaring my colors on this issue. If a rich person got rich ethically, good for them. And while I wish they'd pay more taxes, the underdeveloped world could occupy Ferndale and just as easily ask me (lower middle class by American standards) to share my wealth with them. So, the ethics of wealth distribution is a thornier issue than I can solve here. My point is to help readers read and grapple with Ecclesiastes, not engage in discussions of redistribution of wealth. 

Section 22, Page 25

Panel 1: Mr. Q, Because a bird in the sky may carry your words.

Section 22, Page 26

Panel 1: Mr. Q, And a bird on the wing may report what you say.

At this point I'm really stumped. I'm not proud of what I've done; and I'm not sure it'll survive the next edit. I planned to draw a bird visiting (caricatures of) Trump, Gates, Buffett, and a dozen other of the world's richest men (whom I'll find on Google). That bird will be cursing these rich dudes. However, those curses are lifted from a fabulously funny web site, The Luther Insulter. I couldn't muster the gumption to criticize these wealthy men so I used Luther's insults. It's incongruous, since Luther was insulting religious heretics. Plus, I'm not sure those rich dudes deserve such invective. Yet I'm stuck with this damn bird who's gotta say something to somebody. 

The humor muses have abandoned me. Writing humor isn't pretty.

Dividing Chapter 9

According to that 1919 commentary (A Gentle Cynic by Morris Jastrow) section 20 is comprised of ten verses, 9:1-9:10. Since I'm using his outline I get out my scissors, scotch tape, and large sheet of paper (# 54) and begin cutting and taping those verses on the left hand side. I do this while sitting in my living room, cushioned lap board on my lap, coffee cup, cell phone, and fountain pens on the small table next to me. I'm comfy, serene, in a meditative and contemplative state. My task today is to divide each verse into smaller chunks for the students to respond to. Let the dividing begin.


Ecclesiastes 9

 ¹ So I reflected on all this and concluded

I make this the first meme to come from Mr. Q's mouth in this section. Throughout Ecclesiastes Mr. Q describes in astonishing detail his "research." He was a thoughtful, intentional, empiricist, scientist. Not sure what new response I'll have students make to this comment yet but I am steering readers attention to the fact that this guy was no armchair scholar; it's almost (but not quite) like he was doing double blind control group experiments.

that the righteous and the wise and what they do are in God’s hands

Well this certainly deserves comment by students. Soft determinism runs through Ecclesiastes although in this verse it looks like hard determinism to me. Is God responsible for what the righteous do? I don't know but being in God's hands is to me a comforting thought. 

but no one knows whether love or hate awaits them. 

^{Mr. Q has dropped so many zingers like this throughout the text that I've lost count. It's Mr. Q's acknowledgement of the mysterious future that appeals to me.}

² All share a common destiny—the righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad, the clean and the unclean, those who offer sacrifices and those who do not.

This is one of the lengthier verses I'll put into Mr. Q's mouth. The more words the larger the word balloon and the smaller the panel space in which to draw. I could make a separate page for each of these four comparisons but my initial thought is that doing so will bog down the flow. 

As it is with the good, so with the sinful; as it is with those who take oaths, so with those who are afraid to take them.

I feel the same way about these additional comparisons. It's possible to riff on all six of these binary characters but the bigger literary (and exegetical?) question, "What do I make of his assertion that there is no ultimate difference in the destinies of these twelve individuals?"

 ³ This is the evil in everything that happens under the sun: The same destiny overtakes all. 

It's clear from Mr. Q's previous comments what he thinks of this assertion: it's evil. If he were here I'd ask him several questions: "Why does this bug you so much? Are you sure the same destiny awaits everyone regardless of their virtue or turpitude? Didn't you say earlier that there are some advantages to being righteous? And by the way, why DO you keep contradicting yourself? Have you seen your manuscript lately? How much of what you wrote is still in tact and how many insertions have others made?" The questions never end!

The hearts of people, moreover, are full of evil and there is madness in their hearts while they live, and afterward they join the dead. 

^{At this point in my cut and tape project I've kept the above text in one word balloon. I may later change this because Mr. Q makes two comments that beg for student reaction: "full of evil" and "madness in their hearts." The ANE notions of depravity and insanity deserve comment. I'm not sure yet if I'll address both of these in one strip or give each comment its own strip.}

⁴ Anyone who is among the living has hope


Mr. Q's positive comments are so rare I give them a place of their own. The overall tone of the book is pessimistic, glum, and depressing so I highlight every upbeat phrase that I can.

—even a live dog is better off than a dead lion!

John Stuart Mill said, "It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides." I'm going to try to compare these two comments. 

 ⁵ For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; 


This verse irritates me; I've had to untangle his contradictions so often I'm getting bored. This concerns me. If I get bored readers will too.

they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten. 


In an earlier chapter we batted around the existential quandary of extinction, obliterated memories, and the angst of pointlessness. I'll revisit that notion again. I've felt the sting of being forgotten since my wife contracted Alzheimer's dementia and her memories of me are fading. It's very painful. I'm scouring every word of Ecclesiastes looking for hope. I trust that some breakthrough awaits me, us, him.

⁶ Their love, their hate and their jealousy have long since vanished; 


Here comes more of the pessimism. What a gloomy frame of mind. It's hard to say (as do many commentators) that this comment emerges from sarcasm, Satan, or disconnection from God ("under the sun" is understood by many as "secular humanism"). I reject all those theories....but have yet to come up with a theory of my own. Pondering continues.

never again will they have a part in anything that happens under the sun.


Ditto.

⁷ Go, eat your food with gladness, and drink your wine with a joyful heart, 


Another ray of sunshine amid dark clouds of doom and gloom. 


for God has already approved what you do. 


Another theological puzzle.


⁸ Always be clothed in white, 


For sheer comic relief I'm going to have fun with this one...Tom Wolfe, the Pope, brides, white socks.... It's Mr. Q's intent to affirm happiness despite all this doom and gloom...but the oddity of such a comment begs for response.


and always anoint your head with oil.


How does one apply this custom in the 21st century?


⁹ Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love, all the days of this meaningless life that God has given you under the sun—all your meaningless days. 


Another long blurb from the mouth of Mr. Q, rich with provocative ideas.


For this is your lot in life and in your toilsome labor under the sun. 


<sup>"Lots" remind me of lotteries which remind me of randomness which contrasts with destiny and fate. Lots to untangle here (no pun intended). 


10</sup> Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, 


As gloomy as Mr. Q is, he was no nihilist. He apparently found enough oomph (by faith?) to get a stiff upper lip and make the best of a bad situation. Viktor Frankl did so in Auschwitz and David Livingston did this while suffering in Africa. 


for in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.


Sadly, I'm confronted with yet another conundrum. Did or did not Mr. Q believe in an after life? At times yes, at other times, no. Can't wait to see how I slog though this quagmire yet again without boring myself or readers.


NOTE: Each of those purple quotes will appear in the first panel of a six panel strip. Therefore, these ten verses have been expanded to 21 strips. No wonder the estimated size of this graphic novel is massive.

Statistics

There are 12 chapters, 222 verses and roughly 5261 words in Ecclesiastes. I just completed creating text/dialog for chapter seven, the lengthiest chapter in the book. This means I've grappled with seven chapters, 143 verses, and 4064 words of Ecclesiastes so far. 

I've got five chapters, 79 verses, and 1197 words to go. Seeing progress is encouraging since the going is so slow. 

Chapter seven was the most difficult to transform into a classroom lecture. The content was random, repetitious, inconsistent with other chapters of Ecclesiastes, and very uncomplimentary to women. It provided good fodder for class reactions, but man, was it hard. Good thing I like a challenge.

Five more (shortish) chapters to go and then I get the delicious pleasure of giving the students names and character. (At this point all I have are word balloons with dialog but only rough ideas of who the students are). I'll also do thumb nail sketches, examine the grand arc to the narrative, and make many corrections to the dialog. 

I simply can't wait to see how this thing turns out. In his brilliant book, Stumbling on Happiness, Daniel Gilbert says we are notorious for imagining futures that are way better than they are likely to be (a mistake Qoholeth was prone to  make). On this side of drawing I imagine a Pulitzer, Reuben, Golden Nosey, Mark Twain Award and even a Nobel or two, one for literature and the other for .... oh, I don't know, it doesn't matter. Let's say economics! Let's add appearances on Colbert and Piers Morgan. Grandiosity fuels my creativity. 

On the other hand, waves of self doubt plague me. I imagine this graphic novel will be a disaster and colossal waste of time. I feel like those singers on American Idol who think they're fabulous but can't carry a tune.

I actually relish this double-mindedness. Grandiosity keeps me energized;  insecurity keeps me real. Such are my creative musings today at the completion of a very difficult chapter. Onward!

The Creative Process

Here's a brief summary of the creative writing process. As mentioned in recent posts, I've written "dialog" for chapters 1-6. There are 12 chapters in Ecclesiastes so at this half way point I jump in at Ecclesiastes 7:1.

Mr. Q says, "A good name is better than perfume."

I muse over this, pondering what a classroom of 20-somethings might think of this statement. I know how the class has responded to the first six chapters of Mr. Q's lectures so I'm not entirely adrift; there are precedents, patterns, and familiar (although still nondescript) characters.

I jot a student's initial response, "Finally Mr. Q is giving us something practical we can use." (There's been a history of complaints by the students regarding Mr. Q's pointless laments about the pointlessness of life).

Another student chimes in summarizing what they think Mr. Q is getting at, "A reputation that stinks can't be eliminated with cologne."

Another says, "A pleasant impression that lasts comes not from a bottle but from good behavior."

A fourth says, "It's better to work on our insides than our outsides."

This is all pretty benign stuff and is my attempt to flesh out the point of Mr. Q's words. Knowing, however, what Mr. Q's next words will be I set up a gag with student number five, "Thank you, Mr. Q! My hopes for this class have been restored." (end of six panel strip).

(beginning of next six panel strip). Mr. Q: "And the day of death is better than the day of birth."

I softened the first half of verse one (perfume comments) in order to highlight the hard edge of the second half of verse one, "death is better than life" to which student five on the previous page now laments, "My optimism just vanished."

Frequent readers of Ecclesiastes may gloss over the absurdity of Mr. Q's last comment. My ambition as a writer/artist is to say, "Not so fast! Did you hear what Mr. Q just said?" With dialog and (eventual) cartoons I hope to give Mr. Q a voice, a hearing, an opportunity to explain himself (through student's words) for his outrageous comments and Ecclesiastes 7:1b is one of the more outrageous.

I'll record the completion of this teacher/student exchange in my next post. But first another note concerning process. There are 222 verses in Ecclesiastes. If I chop each in half (or thirds) and give each it's own six panel cartoon strip, I'll be creating between 450 and 500 strips. Since the setting of these strips is inside a university classroom there will be no car crashes, leaps from tall buildings, or exotic beach scenes. It's going to be a lot of talking heads. This sounds boring so my ambition is to create exquisite caricatures and dialog.

To keep the dialog crisp and engaging I will expunge every superfluous word, arcane reference, and lumbering sentence. To do this I am walking the fine line between past, present, and future. I know what I've written in the first six chapters (past) so there is some context (present). And I have a general grasp of what Mr. Q will say (future). But...I do not look ahead more than a few verses to see what's coming. The circle of light cast by a flashlight illumines one's steps only a few feet at a time; the scope of light I'm working with is only a few verses at a time. I really do feel like I'm groping in the dark, step by step, verse by verse, slowly marching to the end of chapter 12.

Once dialog for all 12 chapters is complete I'll do "grand" editing, checking for flow, lags, lulls, and lumpy prose. For example, I introduced Mr. Q's TA in about chapter five which was a mistake. She should be introduced earlier since her role will be to elaborate on Mr. Q's utterances.

So this is the process. Next post: how I turned perfume and death days into grist for philosophical reflection.

Tasks Accomplished So Far

I've read six commentaries on Ecclesiastes as well as a number of related works (I'm currently reading Man's Search for Meaning by Viktor Frankl and just finished Tom Sawyer where Mark Twain puts in Huck Finn's mouth these Ecclesiastic-like words, "Bein' rich aint what it's cracked up to be. It's just worry and worry, and  sweat and sweat and wishin' you was dead all the time").

I've plotted the "story line" of the graphic novel as follows:

Setting: university classroom packed with students of all and no philosophical/theological persuasions.

Professor: Mr. Q. Q stands for Qoheleth, the author of Ecclesiastes.

Dialog: Mr. Q will stand in front of the class and his word balloons will contain every word/phrase of Ecclesiastes. Readers (hopefully) won't know his "lecture" is really taken from a written manuscript; few things are as boring as listening to someone read their speech. Students will then discuss with each other their impressions, reactions, and puzzlement over Mr. Q's unorthodox philosophy.

Title: I began calling the graphic novel ANGST 101. I then changed it to HAPPINESS 101. I dropped that and settled on ECCLESIASTES U. This is subject to change as well but that's the working title at present.

Humor: I'm no Conan O'Brien but I do aspire to balance the pessimism of Mr. Q's lectures with the wit and wisdom of class members.

Layout: As I create this classroom dialog between Mr. Q and a variety of students, I'm typing text into six panels in Publisher 8.5" x 11" (landscape). Mr. Q gets first panel, each of his sentences beginning with a capital Old English font. Student reactions take up the remaining five panels. Here's a sample taken at random.

Current status:  I have written the dialog for Ecclesiastes chapters 1-6. I've six chapters to go.