Oh, The Jobs That Get Killed, Part Two

Here’s the second batch of illos from last Summer’s killed Dr Seuss parody book project, the saga of which can be read here. 

Cartoonist Darren Gendron brought my attention to a successful legal action by the Geisel estate against Penguin Books in 1997. It seems that, at the height of the OJ Simpson trial, the folks at Penguin were moving forward with a Dr Seuss-style parody of the OJ case, written in anapestic tetrameter, with Seuss-style illos and the divinely inspired title, “The Cat NOT In The Hat.” 

After reading about the case, I find it hard to decide whose side I’m on. It’s pretty obvious that “The Cat NOT In The Hat” was going to be a TERRIBLE book, and the world is probably an infinitesimally better place thanks to the swift action of the Geisel estate’s attorneys. That said, I can’t see how a book featuring drawings of OJ Simpson wearing a red & white striped hat could ever be confused with the genuine works of Dr Seuss.

As far as I can tell, Penguin wasn’t appropriating Seuss’ trademarked characters for profit, (as Dan O’Neill and the infamous Air Pirates did with Disney’s characters in 1971), and I can’t imagine anyone stupid enough to accidentally hand their child Penguin’s OJ parody book in place of the actual “The Cat In The Hat.”  So, why did the judge side with the Geisel estate?

The Plaintiff’s complaint cites an interesting opinion by SCOTUS justice David Souter in Acuff v. Rose: “For the purposes of copyright law, the nub of the definitions, and the heart of any parodist’s claim to quote from existing material, is the use of some elements of a prior author’s composition to create a new one that, at least in part, comments on that authors works…. If, on the contrary, the commentary has no critical bearing on the substance or style of the original composition, which the alleged infringe merely uses to get attention or to avoid the drudgery in working up something fresh, the claim to fairness in borrowing from another’s work diminishes accordingly (if it does not vanish), and other factors, like the extent of its commerciality, loom larger.”

In other words, it’s not parody, (i.e. protected speech) if you’re merely borrowing elements of the original work to get attention and save yourself the drudgery of coming up with something new. But then, doesn’t the use of Seuss’s gimmicks, (the striped hat, the drawing style, the rhyming pattern) juxtaposed with the horror of the Simpson case add up to some kind of commentary on Seuss’s work, and beyond that, is it even possible to create new work that doesn’t draw on existing material? Isn’t new art always, (to some degree) a synthesis of what came before?

My verdict: bad book shut down by worse decision.

More info about the Seuss v. Penguin action here.

Oh, The Jobs That Get Killed, Part One

I spent the Summer of 2011 working on a heap of illos for a satirical book project about how terrible job prospects are for recent grads in this shitty economy. The publisher, (who for their own protection will go unnamed here) had the tragically brilliant idea of massaging the written text into the format of a Dr Seuss book, and I was tapped to provide the illustrations.

This assignment was a bit of a stretch for me, not only because I’m not the illustration world’s most adept style mimic, (R. Sikoryak comes to mind), but also because Dr Seuss’ wildly loose approach to drawing is pretty much the polar opposite of my own unforgivingly precise, tight-assed style. Nevertheless, I’m a big Seuss fan, and I welcome the occasional modest challenge, so I dove into a stack of Seuss books and got to work. 

A few months into the project, (after I’d turned in about half of the book’s 80 or so illos) the publisher sent promo materials for the book  out to retailers. Apparently, some wicked, Grinch-like person felt compelled to pass these materials along to attorneys who work for the Ted Geisel estate, at which point this flock of legal carrion birds descended on my publisher much as the Onceler clan does on a newly-discovered forest of virgin Truffula trees.

Okay, enough of the Seuss metaphors. Suffice to say that my publisher was hit with a Cease & Desist letter, and the project was killed, in spite of our well-established First Amendment right to commit parody.

Sometimes it’s actually a relief when jobs get killed, but more often it comes as a bit of a heartbreak, (at least in my experience), and this episode definitely falls into the second category. In spite of the generous kill fee I was paid, I was disappointed that these drawings would never be seen. Now that some time has passed, I’ve picked twelve of my favorites, which I’ll post in two batches. I hope you like them!

Four LOVE & SEX spots for LV Weekly

Four illos for the February 9th, 2012 issue of LAS VEGAS WEEKLY, 

the “Love & Sex Issue,” art direction by Ryan Olbrysh.

ABE LINCOLN ILLOS

For Presidents Day, here’s some Abraham Lincoln illos. “Four Lincolns” was for Chicago Magazine, December 2005, art direction by Todd Urban. “Lincoln Pardon” was for New York Press, March 2001, art direction by Michael Gentile. Enjoy your day off!