Happy Holidays, whichever you celebrate

EPIPHANIC HIEROPHANIES

Words: Alex Ness
Images: Marc Kleinhenz
(copyright 2009)


THE PROMISE

Bells and sleighs and winter snows
Pine forests and silent nights
Are frames for the photos
Of celebrations of life

Of the world in slumber
To receive the blessings
Of the new child of wonder
Of a new year of living

We bow down before
The majesty of the king
For the new year
Rekindles

New life in our veins
Wipes out the clutter
That presaged our ways
The child is redemption

We know it is true
We recognize the promise
That we can renew
So we bow down and rise


TO AWAKEN IN WINTER

What is there in our sleep
The winter is our dream
We huddle down tightly
To warm from the days
We huddle to sleep through the nights
The season is our reminder
That there is a cycle
We are part of in life
Birth in Spring
To dance in Summer
To quiet in Autumn
And to sleep in the depths
Of Winter’s embrace
But in the midst of that
Though the cold
We have warmth and hope
For a season of giving begins
To remind us all of the gifts
We are given
And the hope for a world
To awaken with joy




SENDING AND NEVER ENDING

Sending cards
Sending prayers
Sending thoughts
Lighting candles

Children laughing
Paper ripping
People singing
Fires warming
Life is good
Together

Christmas songs
Trees decorated
Presents wrapped
Food prepared
Remembering lives
Forever

Every moment
Every hug
Cherished and saved
For the year’s slog
Through event and trial
Each year an endeavor

Time for endings
Time for beginings
Time to share
Loving within
Every bond
Secured

Never ending love







SACRED GROUND

Every moment spent together
Is a promise to be moral
Kind, and simply better
For in sharing we become kin
For in loving, we become good

In the midst of the year’s coldest weather
We are called to join together in love
We give gifts
We love and share
We wait for sounds from above

Of footsteps upon our roof
So children can know
That love is more than familial
That love is the truth

It comes from within but grows only
When shared with others
Together
Who are in need

Father Christmas is proof
That we are bound
That when we love as if loving forever
Our lives become sacred holy ground





CHRISTMAS

To the children of African skies
Who dreamed of a better day
He brings love and hope

To the children of Europe
Who long to feel in a world so modern
He brings hope and love

To the children of North America
Who forget if never taught his truth
He brings gifts of dreams

To the children of Asia
Where so few know his name
He brings the love of good

To the children of South America
Where hope is bound with morning
The children will rise and be surprised

To the children of and in worlds unspoken
Father Christmas is love
And is a promise unbroken


Marc Kleinhenz interviews Alex Ness about the project...

How did you come to be involved with the project?

As Marc Kleinheimer asked me to collaborate with him, it was really not a question of if but of do I have the time to do it. I have respect for him and thought it would be nice. As it turned out, from the time he asked to the time I finally finished, my life experienced some turmoil. A good friend of a dozen years passed away, my mom had ended a very sad visit here in my home, where she spent nearly the whole of it in bed, sleeping due to her Alzheimer's, and the aftermath of a big fallout with a publisher/artist was going on to depress the life out of me.

So when facing the poems, I had to consider the subject, the Christmas holiday, versus my own sorrow. But I did it.

With that said, how much of that sorrow do you think bled through? And of that quantity, how much was intentional?

Intention is different, I think, than result. My intention was to channel the glory of the season, and if there is sorrow in it, it was neither purposed nor desired. However, I am not saying any of the work for pic was something I wasn't happy with. The fact remains, however, that the message is receiver-driven, and whatever the voice of the creative talent, the receiver is bound to receive the message through their own particular mindset, circumstances, beliefs, hopes, fears... A perfect example of this would be the number of poems I've written in worship for God but, having not named God in the work, is received as worship from an adoring lover. It is all good, mind you -- I hope my love for God is so true as that -- but beyond that, if a person has only a hammer, they tend to see everything else as nails.

I find that a very interesting response; in a previous interview you did last year, you said: "I have dropped the view that the message is with the receiver. That is a cultural myth we hold."

Well, there is an amazing amount of suggestion that it should be true, almost saying that the receiver is so much more important than the work or voice of the work. I think that it should just be noted that, whatever the receiver brings to the poem or prose or movie or song, if the subject is about Godzilla, the receiver is free to interpret, and will interpret it however it will. So my point is that, when dealing with creative works and the reception of the same, you both create a work, and allow it to be interpreted. The fact is, the creator of a work is not hostage to the interpretation by the receiver, but the receiver is under no onus to do or think or feel anything that the creative person wishes. I knew someone who got a perverse thrill out of masturbating to nude photos done in an artistic and non-prurient fashion. He said he wanted to teach the photographers and models that he could do whatever it is he would do. I am not saying that the actual message is receiver-bound, but that the receiver is unbound by anything to accept what the intended message is.

Two of the biggest thematic motifs throughout both your work and your conversations about your work are religion and the nature of and value in art. So let me ask: where does religion end and spirituality begin? And where does spirituality end and art begin? Or is there any connection between the three at all?

Religion is a set of beliefs that have a code based around them. It involves ritual, standardized patterns of worship, something you can say I am -- and someone will have at least a clue what you are saying you are. Spirituality is both more than and less than that. People who follow a religious belief are not all spiritual, but most of them are. But not all people who are spiritual follow a religion. I think religion is more of a template to believe and spirituality is living and believing in what you believe.

Spirituality and art are connected in that we are made in the image of the creator, and, from what I can tell, the manner in which we worship, understand, grow is to create. Some people create and raise children. Some create arts. Some create paradigms to understand reality. I am sure not everyone agrees that when they create they are being spiritual, but I am suggesting, whether they realize it or not, creation is an act of spirituality that celebrates the creator/ creation. I am a Christian, but some suggest I am a universalist. I am not that, but the truth is I am much more emotive, organic in belief, than religious. So I am more spiritual than religious.

When you sit down to write, is there a conscious decision to include spiritual or religious overlays to your work?

Well, in the case of Christmas poems, I certainly didn't avoid such messages or imagery, but the best answer is no, it is not usually a conscious decision.

How closely do the Epiphanic poems resemble what you had originally intended? Is there usually a lot of variance in the writing process for you?

Okay, this gets into just what the poem is about and why I am doing it. Generally speaking, my creative form involves three sorts of beginning places. I get a word combination or am inspired by an image or idea and it burns in my head until I write about it. I read and research a subject, think deeply upon it, then let my words fall where they may. Or I have a subject I am to write about, and I simply write from a Zen place, hoping what results is poetry. In all cases, the original intent is to create something, not a specific item, really, but something. In that case there is no variance between what I wanted and what resulted. In a very real sense, I almost never know how my effort will result, but I am content that if it is a poem, it is good.

How often with your poetry do you go back and rewrite? Not just edit or tweak words, but actually redraft and re-contemplate?

Never.

That's interesting. That's quite the opposite of someone like John Keats, who could literally spend years writing and rewriting and rewriting just one poem. Do you think there's any inherent advantage or disadvantage to either approach?

The reality is that you can achieve perfection both ways. I think there is evidence that the first blush is often as good as the end result of hyper-revisionist tendencies. So, the advantage, of course, to less edits is that you get the original intent; the advantage to more edits is that you may reach the perfect formula of words. As a creative person, I understand the desire to achieve perfection and think it is a good thing if you can arrive there. The vast majority of people I know, however, who do the hyper-critical editorial eye are never happy, ever, with their work. The vast majority of people who are one-run-and-done might be more prone to flaws, but they appreciate their result.

How often do you feel you've reached perfection in your work?

I am not a perfectionist, so I've never considered it. And, frankly, a prophet who interprets his visions is a fool, and an artist who assesses his work or its importance is a bigger fool.

This may be a silly question, but are you happy with the way the Epiphanic Heirophanies poems came out?

I don't let anything be published in my name that I am not happy with. Any poem I write that you see I am happy with. I have had works in numerous anthologies that the book itself I am unhappy with (Mysterious Visions After Hours, for example) but am happy with my own work and that of others.

In that case, are you happy with the way the photographs came out?

I've worked with many artists and photographers and only once have I felt that their work was wrong. I guess it is because I let others interpret as they will. I might well have taken or used more black and white images myself, but that is a personal preference, and I am not the one doing the interpretation. The answer is yes, I am happy with the photography accompanying the words.

How did the word-picture process work? Did you write to the pictures or vice versa?

I've no idea, really, how others work, but more than anything else, if I see an image, it causes words to form in my head. It always has. Some people are moved by music, and I love music, but more images bring tears to my eyes than songs. So, for me, while I don't write to an image, there is always one in my mind. I've been told my work is highly visual, so perhaps it is because of that.

So you wrote the poems first, then Marc added the pictures?

Very much so. On two occasions he asked me for a response to a pic, but that is the only time.

Generally speaking, do you think the pictures added to or subtracted from your original intent or internal imagery? Or were they completely off-base to what you had in your head?

I think the pics worked, and they were Marc's interpretation, so I am content with how they worked. Any time I enter into a collaborative effort, I fully allow the partner to do his or her thing.

Has there ever been a time when you thought a collaboration with another artist, for whatever reason, just fell through or flat?

Fell through? Ha! I had two books promised to me to come out by July 2009 that never happened, and one of them was originally promised by October 2008. Collaborations fall through more than happen. Fall flat, though? I am sure it happens, but I've been extraordinarily lucky every time with projects that happen. Marc Kleinhopper included.

Given the infinite medium that is the internet, what is poetry's future?

The future of poetry is ever more bright with the existence of the internet. People are able to share 100 times easier, get feedback, get published, even if it is self-publishing. Places like Lulu.com, CreateSpace.com, and more popped up and you can get your work out there.

Can you make money at it? I can't, but that doesn't mean I will stop trying.

That leads perfectly to the next question: what's your future in/with poetry?

I have 3,000 unpublished poems. Most are good work. If I don't publish them or have them published, it will be up to my wife or son to do so. I never stop writing. If I did, I'd die.

I plan to write until I die. Whensoever that occurs.

What is your favorite type of poem? Iambic pentameter? Haiku? Free verse?

I love all forms of poetry, probably especially if I understand them. There are people who throw this and that and the other thing in a list of demands and it has nothing to do with form, style, or, in the end, enjoyment. I like free verse, but blank verse interests me, and haiku is magnificent.

If the life and biography of Alex Ness were written as poetry, what form would it take? And how long would it be?

I could do it in a haiku. Let me see:

Falling upon rocks
I scream at indignities
And people applaud

KILL ALL MONSTERS!

KILL ALL MONSTERS!


(This interview is with Jason Copland and Michael May, two very good friends of mine who have a creative work they've brought to the public, called KILL ALL MONSTERS! I am biased, in that I know both well, and don't intend to chew any new assholes with this, but, the work speaks for itself, they are doing incredibly good work. Please click the images for a bigger, more clear and stunning look...)

Alex Ness: What is the concept?

Jason Copland: Giant Robots fighting Giant Monsters set in the near future.

Michael May: That pretty much sums it up. I always like to add though that it’s a future where the monsters have already won the war. They’ve obliterated most of humanity and left only a few people scattered across the world to fight back. Which they’re about to start doing, in spades.

Who came up with it?

MM: The idea to do a book about giant robots fighting giant monsters was all Jason’s. But some yahoo named Alex Ness came up with the basic world that the story would be told in, for which I’m eternally grateful. I came up with the story we’re telling and created the characters, but you created the starting point and it’s been a lot of fun building from that.



Why a webcomic?

MM: We’ve been working on it long enough that comics formats have changed as we’ve developed it. We originally conceived it as a traditional mini-series broken up into periodical issues, but as graphic novels started to become more prevalent, we started thinking of it in those terms. Even then though, a lot of the publishers we pitched to still wanted to publish single issues and it was tricky. Not knowing how it would eventually be released, we had to keep our minds open to either format.

Eventually though, we realized that weren’t getting any firm commitments from publishers. We had a couple who were interested, but no one was saying, “Let’s print this thing!” So Jason and I decided to take matters into our own hands. We know we have a cool story; we just want people to be able to read it and the Internet’s the easiest way to do that right now. We’ll figure out how to make money on it later.

What popular culture works have influenced this work?

Jason: For me, mostly Shogun Warrior comics and Godzilla movies.

MM: I didn’t grow up with a lot of giant monster/robot stuff. Other than King Kong, I don’t know that I saw any of the classic stuff until after we started working on Kill All Monsters. I was aware that stuff like Godzilla and Voltron existed, but I never watched it.

Probably the thing that more directly influences my storytelling style on this than anything else is the first Star Wars movie. Not plot-wise, but in lots of other ways: from how the story starts in the middle of a battle to the way the characters interact with each other to its PG-rating. Our main characters Spencer, Akemi, and Dressen aren’t direct analogues to Luke, Leia, and Han, but I wanted them to have a similar camaraderie in the way they work together. I want Kill All Monsters to have the same sense of fun that I experienced when I first saw Star Wars in 1977.

I should mention though that I had some help in applying that influence. I originally conceived a much darker story and Jason and I actually created an entire first issue from it. It focused on how bleak the KAM world is and was mostly a character study about what it would be like to live in that world. At the time, our friend Jason Rodriguez was helping us develop the book and he wisely questioned my approach; especially about how low-key the ending was. He told me we needed a big climax. “You have to blow up the Death Star,” he said. That was a defining moment for me. It not only completely changed my ending for that first version of the story, it contributed to our eventually deciding to scrap that version altogether and come up with a bigger, more adventurous story to tell.

Why does Jason talk weird?

Jason: I don’t know what you are talking aboot, eh.

Is the intent with Monsters needing to be killed to make it Kaiju big monsters or more Cloverfield big monster scary?

MM: Hm. If I understand the distinction, then it’s probably more Cloverfield than Godzilla. Or at least, it’s more Cloverfield than what Godzilla eventually became. We owe a lot to the original Gojira though, which had much more in common with Cloverfield than it did with – say – Son of Godzilla.

Our giant monsters aren’t at all heroic and they rarely fight each other. They’re more forces of nature. Again, more like the original Gojira, our monsters were created by human technology that perverted nature and came back to bite us on the butt. There’s a huge theme about technology vs. nature that runs through the story. It’s just as important for us to think about today as it was in the ‘50s when Gojira came out. We need to be scared about the influence our technology is having on the planet.



Michael what movie monsters do you dig?

MM: In any other context, I’d go straight to the Universal monsters from the ’30s and ‘40s. Especially Frankenstein’s Monster and the Wolf Man. I love how human those guys are in spite of their monstrous appearances (and sometimes, actions).

But if we’re talking about giant ones, I’ll start with Godzilla as portrayed in the first couple of movies. Not that I hate the sillier Godzilla or anything. Another favorite is Mothra, who’s very much from that goofier world. And I love her because she’s so kind and unmonstrous with her island of peaceful worshipers and little fairy priestesses. I don’t so much dig the influence she had on Godzilla, but I like her.

On the flip side of that, I like King Ghidorah because he has the guts to stay evil. At least up to the point where I am in the series. I’m only just now digging into those movies.

Oh! Can’t forget King Kong. Especially as portrayed in the Peter Jackson version. I know that’s an unpopular thing to say among hardcore fans, but I never really felt Kong’s plight until I saw Jackson’s film. I intellectually acknowledged that Denham did a crappy thing, but I never felt anything about it. Jackson’s movie makes me cry.

My son and I are currently watching the Firebreather movie on TiVo and also really like Belloc. I can’t wait to dig into the comics and learn more about him.

After a while would you publish this yourselves if it does not get picked up for print?

Jason: We will definitely print this ourselves if no publisher steps up.

Imagine this work in film, how could it be brought to life, would it have to be cartoon?

Jason: No, I think it would work as a traditional film.

MM: It would be cool to see as a cartoon, especially if someone like Genndy Tartakovsky was to do it (if, you know, he wasn’t already doing giant robots vs. giant monsters on Symbionic Titan). But I agree with Jason. There’s no reason it couldn’t be done as a live-action movie and it makes me extremely giddy to imagine it that way.

Where can everyone find the work?

Jason: Here or Here.

MM: We’re the only comic at the Kamikaze website for now, but as Kamikaze adds to its pool, we’ll share that spot with other comics. The Review2AKill address Jason mentioned is exclusively us.

Giant monster/robot fans can also get updates on the comic as well as other giant news at our blog.

CHUCK DIXON TALKS ABOUT WINTERWORLD in time for winter

I’ve always enjoyed Chuck Dixon’s writing. And he has a considerable portion of my comic book TPB bookshelf. The work he did that I would consider to be my favorite is Winter World. The good people at IDW released a collection of it, as well as the second part of the saga, and I am pleased to present this interview with Chuck Dixon about the work, and his place in the comic world.

I’ve given away so many sets of Winter World I feel as if I’ve perhaps shrunk the potential audience for your new IDW collection of the first series and the previously unpublished Winter Sea. When the work first came out, what was your goal in writing and telling the story? Was it a story that was any part political, any part bigger picture allegory, or was it just a ripping good adventure in a stark environment? If the last, are those kind of stories still arriving on the comic market shelves or has the glory of a story written without agenda passed?

Winter World was entirely inspired by seeing Jorge Zaffino's artwork for the first time. I had not even an inkling of this story until I saw Jorge's portfolio. My visceral reaction was, "I gotta create something for this guy!"

Winter World was designed to take advantage of everything Jorge did so well. Evocative characters, convincing action, dangerous settings and the treachery of Mother Nature. This guy drew the best weather since Joe Kubert.

I had no political agenda and the first editions contained a disclaimer that Winter World was not meant as a cautionary tale about the environment.

Most of what I see in today's "mature" comics seems to have either a political angle to it or a conscious effort to be meaningful. I've always aimed only to write escapist fiction.

What influenced the story regarding environment, historic tales, fictional tales, what writers, what artists?

A lot of Winter World probably grew out of being a kid back in the "duck and cover" days of the Cold War. We had air raid drills at school and were even sent home one day and told to have our parents write down the time of our arrival so that it could be determined whether or not to send us home to die with our families. I remember bomb shelters and covers of Life magazine showing Soviet rockets raining down on Manhattan. All this fueled by lots of Twilight Zone episodes and movies like Fail Safe. A rich, dark fantasy life evolved from all that in which I would imagine a post-nuclear war and how my family would survive against our neighbors. I'm kind of hard-wired for creating bitter, cynical survivalist adventures.

With the world gripped by fears of global climate change and global warming, however accurate or not those fears are, do you think that such a book as Winter World is actually a refreshing change from that sort of paradigm, or, does that not play into how you see it? Why or why not?

Mark Twain said that "everyone talks about the weather but no one ever does anything about it." Now we're in a very weird age of co-mingled hubris and fear in which we are terrified of the climate but feel we can change it. We seem to be afraid of everything now so that even a mild hurricane off the East Coast throws the media into a panic. Once only the weatherman commented on how hot or cold it is. Newscasts now lead with the startling revelation that it is hot in July. Supposedly educational cable channels are crowded with apocalyptic predictions featuring hours and hours of the same half-dozen scientists describing doomsday scenarios in great detail and CGI animation. I suppose that Winter World now plays into those fears with it's violent disruption. I never meant it that way. I just wanted to write a thrilling adventure in an unimaginable world.

You seemed to really hit on something with Jorge Zaffino, where you wrote works that his pencils were perfect for, how rare is it to find an artist and writer so sympatico creatively, and, if not for his tragic death at a modest age of 42, what would his legacy of work look like now?

Despite the language barrier, Jorge and I always seemed to be of one mind as to how the stories should be presented. In one instance, in Seven Block, I wrote a character telling another to go "eff yourself." The editor felt the line was too strong even for a mature comic so I cut it. Jorge never saw the line. When the artwork was handed in, Jorge had drawn the character giving the finger to the other guy.

Some kind of vulgar psychic connection there.

I'm not sure what Jorge would have done if he'd had the opportunity. I had lots of proposals out for him but American editors had a hard time finding a place for him. They're never sure what to do with a guy who doesn't draw the world of superheroes.

Who do you see as being the perfect artist to complete the trilogy with the chapter Winter War? If you started together right now with that prospective artist on that series, how soon could we expect to see it?

Hard to say who could come into finish up. Rodolfo Damaggio would be a choice but he's far too successful in the movie world these days. Someone mentioned Tommy Lee Edwards to me once. That would certainly be a worthy successor. There's other guys I know but I think they're too in awe of Jorge's work to step in.

If you were to see a mass response to this collection and the third part were to occur, what actors could you see playing the main roles in a movie of the story? Would it have to be CGI? Or just go to Minnesota in February and use hand held cameras and shot guns and flash bombs for effects?

I don't really play the casting game. I think of Winter World as a comic first and last. Were it ever to be adapted to film then that's a whole different deal and I'd have little say in how it all turned out. But for me, the comic is my last word on Winter World.

But there's no reason a fine movie could not be shot in some frigid location with little or no effects. Not to sound like some Hollywood hosebag but it's all about the characters.

Is IDW the intellectual inheritor of the mantle of Eclipse comics, the original publisher of Winter World? Or is there one out there right now?

IDW is absolutely the closest thing to Eclipse that's out there right now. With its combination of licensed properties, creator-owned stuff and archival projects it's like time has caught up to Jan and Dean's original vision of a company that fully embraces comics as a medium. For the creators, it's the least corporate of the companies out there right now. Not to say that it's not run by actual grown-ups. But there's none of the show-biz phony doubletalk that's so common in comics right now. No one talks in terms of synergy or similar BS. Dealing with Ted Adams and the rest of the folks reminds me of dealing with Dean Mullaney back in the day. You present them with an idea and they come back with whether or not it will work and real world reasons why or why not. No lame excuses or gladhanding.

As some people read a while back, a long while back, in my column at PopThought.com, we discussed how Eclipse was a ripe area for talents like yourself and Timothy Truman, Beau Smith, Alan Moore even, and others, to spread your wings outside of the constrictions of an over arching continuity and genres found at Marvel or DC. Do you see the market allowing such a broadly minded publisher rising again?

As I answered above, I think IDW is that company. But times have changed. When Eclipse was going strong the market for comics was hot. While you can have a talent gain heat these days it seems to be a heat that burns hot and fast. The criteria for "hotness" is no longer subjective. You have it being determined on one end by the increasingly irrelevant Wizard magazine and like websites for the superhero market and on the other end Entertainment Weekly for the boutique "precious" comics market.

Within comics you are a “famously conservative” creative talent. How do you see that, if at all, as affecting the layers of your stories and ideas filling your work? Is it possible for a creative talent to create OUTSIDE of his ideas and beliefs? If so, how? I have no idea.

Make that "infamously" conservative. I try not to place any of my political beliefs in my work. Batman or GI Joe are escapist entertainment and not a platform for my views. Even when I write The Simpsons I skewer both sides.

Last question, are there any plans for an Evangeline series in similar collection? For those who never read it, it is a kick ass Nun in an apocalyptic sort of future...
The ownership of Evangeline is murky at best. I doubt it's worth the time and expense it would take to disentangle it.

Thank you Chuck Dixon.