How did you get involved with ACM SIGGRAPH?

They asked me. (laughs) I’ve know SIGGRAPH by its reputation for a long time. But because my first priority is to sit at the drawing table and draw, I don’t get to do a lot of extracurricular activities, unless they are related to work. When I get hired to speak somewhere, that’s when I go. This is actually my very first time at SIGGRAPH. After all these years, I’ve never been here before.

Have you seen much of the conference yet?

No, I mostly took a look at my laptop screen getting ready for today’s talk. (laughs) I was very nervous about today’s talk because I’ve been on tour for a year, and so many people have seen me, I was worried that most of the audience had already seen me. So, I was working hard to add something new. But I do look forward to seeing the floor.

Is storytelling something that always comes naturally to you?

Storytelling is something that has always come naturally to me. When I was in high school with writer Kurt Busiek, he was the writer and I was the artist. Even 20 years later, I still have that sense that I am an artist first and a writer second. In many ways, I think I have a better grasp on how the art works, rather than how the story works. Only recently have I begun to focus on story structure and what makes a good story. This is partly because I was the graphic novel I’m about to begin creating to be the best it can be. I have a story I like and I want to understand why I like it. I also want to know how not to ruin it. (laughs) So I’m trying very hard to tease apart what makes stories work.

How do you push the boundaries of storytelling within comics? Is it possible to give tools to readers to make them more active participants?

There are two aspects to stories in comics. One is how a story works in comics form - how you convert your stories into comics. That’s very form specific, and that’s what I’ve been focusing on so far. The broader issue is how stories act in the mind and why we're drawn to certain ones. And that’s obviously applicable beyond comics. And though I’m approaching it from a very personable standpoint, I understand that if I were to come up with any useful ideas that  they would have applications beyond my form.

I think the notion of giving tools to people, to empower them to be creators of their own work, is a powerful trend in technology and culture right now. In gaming specifically, the idea that you are the creator and author of your own experience has always been a big part of the appeal. My friend Doug Church has talked about the notion that in creating a video game you are advocating authorship; that the experience of the user should feel like an experience they helped create. When we play a game we don’t think of playing someone else’s experience, we think we have authored our own experience. That’s what makes it a game; that’s the very substance of games.

The general notion of empowering users to feel like creators is enormously important especially in visual cultures where generally speaking I think most people have felt helpless in the face of those who are sending visual ideas in culture – government, politics, Madison Avenue. There’s tremendous mastery over visual communication. These skills are not taught in the lower grades and we civilians are not taught we can communicate with images. That’s dangerous because images can bypass our rational filters. I would like to think we would pay more attention to visual literacy.

Every comic artist establishes their visual language differently. Do you see anyone out there trying to push the symbolic language within comics and what we think the language can accomplish?

I think it is one of the key areas where progressive work is being done. There are artists that are pushing what comics' iconography can be used for and what qualifies as a legitimate representation of reality. I think this is a very exciting area right now.

From a traditional point of view, there seems to have been a break in comics and the definition of what a comic is has changed. Challenges have been made to the medium similar to what we’ve seen in other art movements. The theories presented here and the challenges to the medium make me wonder if anyone has ever compared you to Marcel Duchamp.

(Laughs) Actually my friend Larry Marder has been compared to Marcel Duchamp. Duchamp is his personal hero. I think I differ on Duchamp in that I have, like Leonard Bernstein, an irony deficiency, which is not Duchamp’s problem by any means. I’m not a very ironic guy. I’m earnest to the point of blandness. There are not a whole lot of hidden layers to my approach. I’m a very transparent guy, and Duchamp was very opaque. (Laughs) I think that what was one of the things that was wonderful about him. There is one thing I definitely have in common with Duchamp, and that is, he said as he grew older, art interested him less and artists interested him more. I think I know what he meant. I still love art, but more and more I’m becoming very interested with individual artists and what makes them tick.

Where do comics go from here?

Hopefully, everywhere. I would be saddened if comics moved from this point to a clearly marked square on the chessboard. That would be sad and would mean that comics had shrunk again. I like the fact that comics are too big now. I like the fact that one sector of comics isn’t aware of another sector within comics. That’s the way comics should be. The written word can’t get together under one roof, it’s too vast. It cannot see the limits of its world beyond the curve of the planet that it exists on, and comics should be this way as well. There’s expansion on all fronts. Graphic novels, web comics, and even mainstream comics are expanding in the subject matter and styles they can deal with.

Do other mediums that are based in comics have effects on comics as a medium?

It’s interesting, when a film based on a comic comes out, historically, it has not had an effect on the comic sales. What we see now though, in the cases of Sin City or 300, there has been a lot of movement back to find the original works. This is because the original works are associated with an author. So people do see a new Batman film and think, wow, I wonder what’s happening in World’s Finest this week. But, they do see 300 and think, who is this Frank Miller guy? These comics have to have authors. Then we see people coming into the stores looking for specific authors.

How will the visual languages of comics change with new mediums such as digital tools?

I think the two things that will change in the long term (that are not McCloundian Theories or even technological shifts) are compelling content with a desire for seamlessness.  Basically, a method that provides for a seamless reading experience. This would be something that allows for readers to live in the story and not take their eyes away from the story, which is an extremely important and much underrated aspect. Many web experiences force the reader to take their eyes off the story. You cannot allow the readers to take their eyes off the story. If you expect the story to live in their minds, they need to live in the story. If you combine those two things, compelling content and the ability to lose yourself in the story, and not be torn away, then that form will work. Comic strips don’t have that problem. I’m speaking more of long form and graphic novels. We haven’t found a successful way to display long form of comics online.

I’ve noticed that a major part of comics is the reader’s ability to control time. As you read, you can spend as much or little time on each panel. For instance, when I read Sin City, and then saw the movie, in my mind the pacing was different. It made me think that I had possibly missed the point of the author’s intent.

Right. The authors, of course, always know in the back of their heads that they cannot compel you to linger on longer or skip a panel as they would like. That seeding of control is one of comic’s limitations. A gifted artist can work to his or her advantage within that framework.

What is your process?

Well, my digital process includes doing my roughs on paper, then setting them up on big boards and rearranging them until I have the shape that I want. Then, I scan them in, layering the text in Adobe Illustrator, and building up the layers in Photoshop. This has proven to be a very comfortable process for me, especially because I’m using a Wacom Cintiq. I love that machine, and it’s made my life so much easier. After 23 years, I have finally found a process I am comfortable with.

Time to move on (laughs).

(laughs) Ya, really.. I’ll change it all.

Are there issues with the digital tools?

There are some things I wish the brush palette could do. I can’t quite put my finger on it. I think there are features that are hidden that should not be, especially with the creation, selection, and use of brushes. I should save that for Adobe. As a user, I found myself getting confused. I can be pretty dense sometimes, so it could just be me. (Laughs)

There seem to be two camps when it comes to digital illustration.  One that tries to emulate natural media, and one that wants to take it to a whole new level that is unique to the digital realm.

Yeah, on the one had you have the original Painter program, and the other you have digital curves. Like two alien species. (Laughs) Well, fortunately, we can have it all. You can just pick whichever you’re most comfortable with. I’ve found myself working with lines. These lines just happen to be made on a Cintiq in Photoshop. I’ve found myself a responsive canvas. Plus I can play with them and resize without any loss of quality. It’s kind of the best of both worlds. I’m in a very happy place.

Thank you.

Thank you.