Comics: Art or Pop Art?

There's been a recent upturn of comic book related articles these days, across the blogosphere, in mainstream media, and even in local art galleries. One event that I'm most excited about is the Masters of American Comics Exhibit at the Hammer Museum in Westwood. These kind of exhibits aren't very common in large museums as a serious exhibit and partly this may be because such curations can be somewhat Controversial.

As the Los Angeles Times reports, controversy can be overcome. To sum up the article, selecting pieces for such an exhibit is never easy and not all artists are willing to participate. Great exposure? Not necessarily. As pieces of pop art, comics aren't always happy to be on display as such. An interesting point of view is that it cheapens the original intent of the artist, but maybe this is only due to the stigma high art holds towards the graphic narrative. There are names thrown all around in the article, so I'll spare the overlinkage and delve a little deeper into personal opinion.

Personally, I always had a hard time giving myself the label of artist instead preferring the alternative of cartoonist. Is this strange? Well, in a way, I think it is now. Originally, I felt that by calling myself an artist, it'd come off as pretentious or that I considered anything I did to be relevant or important. It's almost like I'd be avoiding any attempt at making an artistic statement. This is where the strangeness comes in. Is taking the label of cartoonist rather than artist limiting? Is there a distinction one draws when you set that pencil down to bristol?

Those are the questions I imagine the artists in the aforementioned article asked themselves before setting out on the precarious journey of pictographic assemblages (thanks Dan Clowes). Most likely, it also comes down to who the art is intended for, is it for yourself or for an audience? The way I see it, I won't present a finished piece unless I'm somewhat happy with it. Maybe that's somewhat selfish ultimately, but one can't really create something without seeing mistakes every step of the way. Nobody's perfect and being a Virgo, some will accept nothing less.

So therefore, maybe artist is more appropriate these days. If you deem your work important to yourself, it doesn't cheapen it at all no matter what exposure it gets as long as you can be proud of it. I think that's how one can get up in the morning and look themselves in the mirror without any constant modicum of self-loathing for being artistically inferior. No competition, no worthlessness. Simple as that, right?

Right?