Here's my comic strip that appeared in yesterday's copy of The Funday Times (a section of The Sunday Times.) It's supposed to tie in with the film Rio 2, but the only real connection is a blue flying thing.
Here's a little peek at the work in progress, and the final printed version. (Thanks for tweeting the photo, @Lorna_May_D!) I did the pencil rough on the plane to Dubai and - my poor editor - it was almost illegible.
There's a big discussion going on right now over on the Awfully Big Blog Adventure, analysing the sentiment: 'Sure, the book is awful, but at least they're reading something'. It's worth reading, particularly for the comments. I commented, but it's right at the end, so you'll most likely miss it, and I was responding more to things in the comments than the original article. So here's my mini article:
Why I hate 'proper books':
I keep encountering this term 'proper books' and I hate it so much. Often it's used in a discussion that puts down books which have illustrations in them or stories told in comics format. I wish we could stop using the words 'proper books' because it means different things to different people. Visually literate, well-read people may use it to judge a book fairly among its peers. But well-intentioned adults who know less about books borrow the term to shame kids away from books that are perfectly good, only because they don't understand that kind of book. They may have leafed through a single poorly made comic book and decided they didn't like comics. Or have recollections of being shamed in childhood for reading books with pictures when an adult deemed them too old for that.
What does 'proper' mean, anyway, that makes it a better word than 'good'? Proper implies a certain serious, stiff-collared, sitting-up-straight-at-the-desk educational worthiness. Not an experience that involves curling up in a safe place and getting lost in a world.
Let's stop saying 'proper books' altogether. Anyone with me on this one?