48 Hours, Bah! Humbug!

Give me Ebenezer Scrooge any day! Last night I had the distinct impression that CBS television was out to outdo the old man in Charles Dickens’ classic story.

The difference is Scrooge was simply a greedy old man who made no bones about his obsession with power and wealth, while 48 Hours attempted to couch their disbelief in pseudo-intellectual jargon.

I have to admit that I watched only a portion of last night’s broadcast. Fifteen minutes was enough to convince me that the producers of that program could use a visit from a few appropriate spirits themselves. So maybe I missed something. Maybe they had a complete change of heart after the first quarter of the program. But I doubt it.

The program began with children at a private elementary school presenting a nativity play. They were given a few sound bites. Then as if to say, “well that’s what ten-year-olds believe, now lets see what some real experts have to say on the matter”, the scene shifted to two New Testament professors. These professors were each given a massive build up, their credentials listed as if taken directly from their résumés. And then the hostess (adorned paradoxically during parts of the program with a gold cross around her neck) dropped the bomb and asked if Jesus was really born in Bethlehem.

The first quarter of the program dealt with this question.

“Are the Gospel accounts accurate?” She asked (or words to that effect, I didn’t tape the thing).

One of the experts responded with, “the Gospel accounts are very difficult to harmonize on the subject of the Nativity”. A semi-true statement, but extremely misleading.

You see, a harmony in music occurs when two or more instruments or singers are performing the SAME PASSAGE. A solo part occurs when one or the other is performing a single line alone. So to HARMONIZE means to deal with the exact same portion of something in different ways. To harmonize the Gospels means to bring two or more parallel passages together and compare the slight variations.

The Gospels do cover some of the same material when speaking of the Nativity of Christ, but divert on others. It doesn’t mean they contradict each other, it simply means that some of the material is unique to each. In other words a harmony does not occur if a solo is going on.

Matthew tells us, “Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king…” (Matt. 2:1a)

Mark doesn’t give an account of the Nativity.

Luke gives a longer account which corroborates Matthew; “Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem…” (Luke 2:4a)

The experts interviewed said that John’s Gospel, “doesn’t know anything about Jesus being born in Bethlehem”. Another misleading statement. While John didn’t spend any time at the beginning of his account on Jesus’ birth per se, he goes right to the heart of the matter, and says that Jesus is GOD. (John 1:1)

Furthermore there is a passage later in John’s Gospel that corroborates the Nativity stories of Matthew and Luke. In John 7:41-42 “Has not the scripture said the Christ is descended from David, and comes from Bethlehem…?” The text assumes that Jesus was indeed descended from David and was born in Bethlehem. That the experts glossed over this passage makes me wonder just how closely they have been reading their Bibles.

So the crew at 48 Hours went to Nazareth, and confronted a man in a market. “Did you know that many experts believe that Jesus was born HERE, on this very spot, and not in Bethlehem?” The man responded, “No! I don’t believe it.” And that was that.

Which begs the questions: What experts? Who is this man who you are confronting with this supposed fact? Why not give some time to some opposing views, rather than your two chosen cynics? What about the historical records that corroborate that a census was indeed taken when Quirinius was Governor of Syria?

But rather than answer those questions the 48 Hours crew pressed on.

The experts again linked partially true statements with misleading statements and came up with this whopper. “The four Gospels were written for different audiences” (true) “and so the Gospel writers tailored those accounts to fit their specific readers” (also true). “So the Gospels are a mixture of fact and fiction” (I beg your pardon?).

This goes back to what I said above about them not reading their Bibles carefully. According to them Matthew and Luke were making stuff up. But if they had bothered to read Luke’s introductory statements they would have possibly questioned their own motives for casting doubts on the text.

“Inasmuch as many have undertaken the compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you many know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed”. (Luke 1: 1-4)

Here Luke is making statements that he investigated carefully and is reporting those things dutifully. Many times in his Gospel one can read the principle of being honest expounded, and yet these experts would have us believe that in the very next line Luke begins to lie to his readers?

Sounds like the reporters at 48 Hours are doing a little projection of their own faults.

So what has this got to do with my comics and cartooning? Simple, the folks at 48 Hours painted a broad and vicious characature of Christians as ignorant uneducated idiots. As a cartoonist I am honor bound to report that such broad characatures are not exemplary of the state-of-the-art. When journalists start messing around on my turf then it’s time to strike back. They cartoon, I report.

Am I writing from a Christian perspective? Sure. I’m also writing from an informed perspective…more than I can say of the producers of 48 Hours or their supposed experts.

Scrooge at least knew when to repent.

Uncle Biscuit Rides Again!

“Where have you been?” you may be asking. If anyone is out there who’s been looking to see what I’ve written lately, and hasn’t seen anything, well…

As with pretty much everyone this time of year, I’ve been busy with Christmas. But that’s a bit of a simplification.

Sure, I’ve been out there doing shopping. Karin’s played a number of Christmas services at area churches and the like, and I’ve been carrying her harp to those venues.

Gypsy Bandwagon has been booked for Christmas Eve at Westville Pub in West Asheville, NC. Lance arranged this since he felt it would be nice for people who have nowhere else to go on Christmas Eve. And Karin and I couldn’t be more excited about that outreach. We’re working on that show pretty heavily now, and with five days to go we’ll have to concentrate on it even more as it approaches.

I have admit that yesterday was the first time I picked up my sticks and drummed along with our debut CD, “Stole My Mule” (plug) to get warmed up for the show, at least on my own. But I’ve been listening to the CD in the car and on the job. I’ll, hopefully, be able to perform the pieces in my sleep.

And we’re also working on a Christmas set. We played in Biltmore Village on December 3, and so we have had some performance experience with those pieces. Since we played them four times in a row and then went to Lake Junaluska and performed an evening show with those same tunes, I think we’ll do okay. But we’ve got to fill two hours on Christmas Eve, so it may need some more material. We’re working on it.

The show will be something like a CD release party. We’ll be giving away CDs and Christmas gifts. We’ll be working up comedy to fill the gaps. It takes time to make this stuff work.

All of which might lead you to believe that I haven’t done any art. (Yes, this blog is supposed to be about my ART).

Not at all. But it brings up a very important issue. In fact I got a survey from a student in England yesterday (well I got it by way of an acquaintance in England, I assume the student is there). Anyway, the student asked the question, “what do you think of the argument that comics aren’t as important an art form as the others?”

I told him that I feel that anyone who says that really hasn’t thought about it very long. Now, I’m not trying to be “holistic”, but it seems to me that MOST artists of any stripe are involved in one or more particular discipline of art. That is to say, I am a comic book artist, cartoonist, illustrator, and graphic designer; but I have also acted, done comedy, I play drums, bass, compose pop tunes, I’ve been writing fiction lately, etc.

John Singer Sargent said that he wished “music was my medium, rather than bad paintings”. “Bad paintings?” I consider Sargent one of the best painters ever! But he would rather have been playing piano (and apparently was quite good at it). Imagine that.

So, what does this prove? Artists can’t be pinned down to one discipline. So anyone outside of creative endeavors who says, “comics aren’t important” hasn’t seen that many creative individuals love them and find inspiration from that particular medium. Anyone who claims to be an artist and says comics aren’t…well, as a rule of thumb, I’d say that person is a phoney.

Enough on that subject.

I have been doing artwork. In fact, I’ve been doing quite a bit. I’ve done several commissions over the past couple of weeks, and have interested parties for even more. I did a Wonder Woman last evening (still got to ink it). I may try to post the pencils up here as soon as I hear from the guy who commissioned it.

My agent sold my signature Batgirl art on eBay last week. That got sent out Friday.

The guy who was second highest bidder wants to commission a similar piece.

I got finished with several pages I’ve been inking for a small publisher, those also went out Friday.

The big piece I did for some lawyers in Washington, D.C. went over well. They gave me a tip and they may want more!

I’ve been working on a brochure to help me promote commission pieces. Not unlike my commissions page on the ComicArtistsDirect.com website, but for those people who might never log onto my page. I figure you’ve got to work as many angles as you can think of, as long as you aren’t doing wrong in the process.

So obviously, I’ve been at the art “grindstone” pretty much every day.

But it’s hard to keep up with it all. And blogging about it becomes another chore to be taken care of.

Anyway, a Merry Christmas to all if I don’t blog before then!

As a public service…

Today I realized that since no one else is covering this important area of concern, that it is up to me to do it. This important subject is how to take care of an overcrowded in-box. For too long this has been ignored, and today I hope to set things right and return our nation to the efficiency of days past.

We all know how it goes. You're away from your computer for a couple of days. Perhaps a long weekend is all it takes. You decided to check your e-mails and you find something on the order of 100-200 messages! What to do?

Step One: Do not panic! It isn't YOUR fault. Remember this! The tendency is to assume that every e-mail from every sender is an important message from a friend or family member who really needs your kind support and/or assistance.

This is, of course, a total crock! Chances are that even if somewhere in your e-mail list a friend or family member's screen name does appear, it's probably just a forward featuring a set of pictures, or a joke you've seen before. Most of the messages, as we know, are going to be spam of some sort.

Step Two: Identify any and all advertisements and delete them.

If some day you come to your inbox and find that you have say 5-10 e-mails to respond to, and you have some upcoming online shopping to take care of for Christmas or a Birthday, then by all means, take a careful look at these…you might save some money.

But right now you've got 100-200 e-mails to respond to!

Step three: Identify all e-mails from well-meaning-individuals-who-don't-consider-it-spamming-to-send-
you-several-newsletters-per-week, and eliminate them.

In times past people used to craft a short letter of the year's events and send this out with Christmas cards ("…Tommy graduated high school…our goldfish, Goldie, went to that big aquarium in the sky…"). But now I get rambling notes on events (sometimes very personal events, mind you) on a several times weekly basis.

You may feel guilty since you probably once said something stupid like, "Sure! I'd love to get your newsletter!" to this person. Don't worry, they too will write more.

Step four: Read the "re" line closely.

By now you have eliminated around 50-80% of the e-mails in your inbox. So you can afford to take things a little slower.

Read the line that tells you what the letter is supposed to be about.

If this letter contains a string of numbers (for example "00066045097860530xxz") after a semi-intelligent looking subject line, feel free to erase it. It is probably some on-line stock broker, and let's face it, if you're still answering your own e-mail you can't afford to take a chance on any "hot tips". Leave that to Bill Gates…and you know he isn't answering HIS own e-mail.

Speaking of Bill Gates; you can safely eliminate any and all e-mails saying "Incredible Savings from Microsoft!" or similar. They are all fakes. Bill didn't get to be fabulously wealthy by giving the consumer "fabulous" anything.

But I digress…

When reading the "re" line, also avoid things like "Hi, it's Bill, long time no see". Unless you have a pal named Bill who has until recently been blind, you can just about bet this is a cheap come on.

The problem with this part of the process is that it's more subjective than the previous steps. Perhaps that's why it's sometimes called the "Subject Line. You'll have to use your judgment here. But this 30-50% of the e-mails in your inbox could take a considerable amount of your time, until you learn the subtleties of dealing with it. I suggest you start with a short regimen of randomly trashing 2-3 of these questionables a day and increasing until you're randomly trashing 50-60% as soon as you log on. When you start getting angry phone calls from your best friend demanding to know why you haven't responded, or your spouse moves out, then you'll know to taper off a bit.

Step Five: Actually opening an e-mail before trashing it.

Up to this point you should not have opened any e-mails at all. This should have whittled the list down to manageable size. But don't give up on deletions just yet! Many seemingly reasonable people send senseless e-mails without any conscious knowledge at all. You have likely been the recipient of one or more of these. Be very careful at this point, not to assume that just because the e-mail appears to be A)Legitimate and B)from a friend, that it is indeed worth reading.

If, for example, the e-mail comes with a rainbow-color background, you can safely delete it while the background is downloading. The same goes for any e-mail with excessively large purple type. If you get one containing both, it's probably best to delete it as quickly as possible, and contact your local civil defense agency in case you've been accidentally contaminated. (Important Note: This rule of thumb doesn't apply to your spouse, or current paramour! Failure to respond to a similar note in these circumstances may result in severe loneliness for an extended period of time. You have been warned.)

Similarly, e-mails which begin with, "I thought you'd like to see this", UNLESS FROM YOUR ATTORNEY, can usually be deleted without any guilt whatsoever. The main reason being that these e-mails are like re-gifted fruitcake. Whoever sent this e-mail (generally containing a dozen or so photographs of very cute animals engaged in disgusting, but socially acceptable, behavior followed by a number of oversized captions pointing out just how cute the whole thing is, in case you missed that somehow) probably sent it out to everyone in their address book. They don't know who it got sent to, no more than they realize that they sent it to you five times in the past year!

If the e-mail begins with "IMPORTANT VIRUS WARNING! DO NOT DELETE!" Feel free to delete it. This is based on two facts. A) Usually these are fakes, blind copied to every new e-mail addressee that the Phishers can get ahold of and B) Why would your pal assume they're so "in the loop" that they'd get to word on a potentially crippling virus before you would? I mean, by the time you read their e-mail the virus has probably circled the world thirty times and infected your hard-drive at least four. (Unless you drive a Mac, in which case you're more or less immune, like me ;-)

Step Six: Read and respond to the letters that may actually have a purpose.

You've now eliminated 90-99% of e-mails that do not actually affect you directly. You may now safely respond to the remaining e-mails. Reasonable statistical data show that of these remaining letters, some may actually benefit you at some point in the near future. Many will be dead-ends. Some (if you're the sort who engages in on-line dating) may end with you knocked out in an alleyway missing your wallet. But in one way or another these e-mails have the potential to change your life. For better or worse, at least they haven't wasted your time completely.