Why don't I "get" R. Crumb?

Crumb’s a lot of different cats. He’s an iconoclast, which is why SF wouldn’t accept him (he hated hippies along with just about everything else).

I have a collection of his “Weirdo” magazines (which includes this great bit “The Religious Experience of Philip K. Dick”, and he seemed to catch a little of the New York craziness of the 1980s with model Mode O’Day. Pretty savage stuff there.

Then there’s the collected works put out by Fantagraphic. His early stuff, drawn when he was a teenager (funny animal comics) shows an amazing talent swiftly developing. I can admire that.

So with him, I have to pick and choose, and accept him for what he is. Truth be told, I like these cranks, like Crumb and Henry Miller and George Carlin. I may dislike what they say, I can (and will) object to their political beliefs, but it seems to me that if they can find an audience and not get hassled for it (unlike Lenny Bruce), that says something for the health of the society, even though they would not agree with me.

I never really took Crumb up on his invitation to plumb the depths of his dysfunctional psyche. I tried, but I just didn’t care. I liked shallower entertainment in my comix, I guess. Gilbert Shelton (“The Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers”) was always my favorite.

On the other hand, Crumb’s artwork is impressive, even today. I was reminded of it in the film “American Splendor.”

Crumb’s an oddball. He did a relatively recent taped interview with the Comics Journal dude, Gary Groth is it? He came across a a spoiled whiny jerk. The Crumb docu makes him seem like a creepy socially retarded asshole with just enough talent to make people ignore his dickishness.

Wish I could draw like him though…