Grimaud S.I.C. 4-color Playing Cards (Symmetrical International Cards) – In the Collection

I have more playing cards than is good for me, really. I’ve seen so many decks it sometimes seems like I’ve seen them all… usually until the next week, when I find something different. Often it’s just a different back, but there’s still room for me to be surprised with the faces. We haven’t yet perfected the design of the playing card, uniform as it might seem with the dominance of the USPCC (United States Playing Card Company {And to a lesser extent Cartimundi}). Every so often you find a deck that has been designed to meet a specific challenge, such as the Symmetrical International Cards (or S.I.C.) deck, in this case printed by Grimaud, the French playing card manufacturer (now owned by Cartimundi) (I don’t know if any other manufacturer ever produced these cards).

The S.I.C. deck is a design that sets about trying to solve two problems: left handed players wanting to fan their cards the opposite way, and asymmetrical icons on odd numbered cards (that are sometimes used to covertly signal other players). To solve these problems pips are placed in all 4 corners, and on the odd numbered, non-face-cards of 3 suits (diamonds is unchanged) the center pip is replaced by two pips that are slashed in half and meet at the middle. The slashes on spades are left-handed, and the slashes on hearts are right-handed. For clubs the icon now simply has 4 “petals” (leaves) instead of 3. The deck was developed by Michele Leone, a bridge player, to help stop cheating in that game. The design was used by the Italian Bridge Federation around 2010. And that is literally all the information I could find about it.

My particular deck(s) (the one shown here has a yellow back, and I have another with a green back somewhere), printed by Grimaud, also have the clubs and diamonds in green and yellow respectively, rather than their traditional colors. I suspect this is because they wanted to clear up some confusion that may result from having the pips on all 4 corners (I like it but from what I’ve read online it’s pretty divisive). I can find no reference to this deck online. I found it in America, with many other sets of bridge cards (mine isn’t in the original box, instead it’s in an “American Contract Bridge League” box. The cards that are supposed to be inside have quite a different design), and the face-card values are the English standard (J,Q,K). So I just have no clue.

They are one of the most well-thought-out decks of cards I’ve ever seen. Of course it’s not necessary unless you’re worried about people cheating at bridge, but it’s still a lovely design with an unobtrusive back, simple face-card design, and those really neat French-style clubs.

Book Review – Squirrel Seeks Chipmunk: A Modest Bestiary (By: David Sedaris)

Squirrel Seeks Chipmunk is a collection of “comedy” “short stories” by David Sedaris, a writer most known for his humorous essays on various “life” topics. Sedaris was recommended to me by a couple of gentlemen on the street who were purchasing some of my books (I mention this because it’s a sentence I really wanted to say) and as it turned out I already had one of his books, though it is a departure from his usual style (from what I understand, at least). So it might not be the most representative of his works, but is it a good one?

The book consists of 16 stories (Fables? Tales? Skits? Scenes? I’m having trouble coming up with the right word…) that are quite short, most being under seven pages with illustrations and the longest being only 20 pages. Every story has at least one illustration, usually at the beginning or end, though some have more (I assume where more story progression potential was presented by the images). These illustrations, by Ian Falconer, are very skillfully done, and in a very interesting style. I would say I am an overall fan of the aesthetic, but there are certainly points in this book where I think the artwork goes too far (though that is, of course, partly the fault of the story). It is very strange to see artwork that appeals to me present such repulsive images. But I do think that the “kids-book” style juxtaposed with the at-times grotesque content works well as part of the overall atmosphere the creators were going for, and Falconer, being mainly a children’s book author/illustrator (mostly the Olivia books, which I haven’t read but have knowledge of), is well suited to create that look (though I do have a fear of this book being mixed in with children’s books accidentally in second-hand shops and the like).

The stories (fables, whatever) themselves feature animals (simply named “rabbit” or “squirrel”) that are anthropomorphized, though less than in most fables, modern or traditional. The animals have the ability to understand all of the other animals (and humans, it seems) in plain English, but they can’t communicate with humans or perform many actions based on the flow of the story. When it is convenient for a rabbit to be able to heft a big stick, or a parrot wear a costume, they can, but cows and bears still prefer to walk on 4 legs, and most animals can’t escape farms, laboratories, and zoos. I have trouble nailing down what exactly these stories are (as should be obvious), Sedaris’ writing is dry, short, and distinctly modern, and most of the stories’ “morals” are not driven home or they are dunked in woe. Still, they most resemble fables with their talking animals and “morals”. While this isn’t a problem (and perhaps the world needs more works that don’t fit any one genre) it does lead to a problem I have, not necessarily with the book, but with the description of the book. From the back cover, to the genre it’s categorized under, to most of the reviews, this book is called “comedy” or “humor”, a point with which I will have to disagree. Separated from whether or not I liked the writing, all but the first few stories certainly aren’t “funny” (well, they might be in the odd sense) and while they have the “logical-illogical twist” that creates most (perhaps all) humor, this twist is not humorous, but macabre. I’m not one to say that “black humor” doesn’t have a place, or isn’t funny, or even good, but here I just don’t get the “joke” because as far as I can tell there isn’t one. I certainly wasn’t laughing, or even chuckling to myself, while reading.

That isn’t intended to say I disliked the book. While I’m not usually a fan of things in this “area”, I wasn’t having a bad time when reading this book. It was a very interesting modern (and cynical?) look at the fable formula. The morals are blunt and real, with the subjects being harsh and at times violent. Really it’s not unlike the fables of old before they were watered down in their modern retellings. And that makes for a fascinating idea and read. It’s a refreshing look at the idea and a good implementation of the elements of the fable. Most of the stories convey heavy and complex messages in very simple, down-to-earth language that sounds very real; the vernacular (or language of the common fable⸮ {irony mark}) if you will. And while the writing is simple and dry it isn’t boring. It compels the reader to continue while still providing ample logical stopping points at the end of each brief story.

It didn’t take me long to finish the book, which for something this “odd?” is a good thing. Sedaris knows when to stop, and how to correctly pace a story or book. Whether or not that quick read demands the cover price is up to the reader and whether they want a well-crafted piece of entertainment or a bang-for-their-buck piece of longer entertainment. Though if one does go in blind and ends up not liking the book at least it is relatively brief. It packs less of a punch time-wise than most books of its size but more than some graphic novels of its size, and Sedaris and Falconer are both masters of their craft in full control of exactly where they want it to go.

I have a hard time summing this one up. I’m glad I read it, I had a fairly good time reading it, and I would say it’s a good, but not great book. But I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone without extensive knowledge of what they have enjoyed previously, and even then it’s unlikely since the tone isn’t reflected in much other writing. It isn’t a work that makes the world, either whole or in part, better for its existence. It’s strange, visceral, cynical, and at times unpleasant to read. If its own strangeness, or the “challenge” it presents to the beliefs or thoughts floating around in your head warrant its existence in your mind then it is a book that should be out there. But even with that and the undeniable skill of its creators I wouldn’t be handing it off, or giving it as a recommendation or present to anyone. Indeed I’d struggle to find where its audience is.

Review – Sharpie Mean Streak White

I have a pretty liberal definition of what an art supply is. Not quite as liberal as those who say everything is an art supply because (almost) everything you do is art of some kind. But I do think more qualifies as art supplies than the average person does. For instance I would say that everything meant to make a mark is an art supply. And that assumption will be tested here where I take a look at the Sharpie Mean Streak “permanent marking stick”, and see if it has any real art applications.

photo-151

The body is quite large, being about half an inch in diameter. It’s got a good amount of information on the side, but it gets a bit cluttered-looking. The back is a twist knob, like a glue stick. The cap has a slight taper with several ridges for grip. Inside is a pointy cone that can shape or dent the “marking stick” if you put it in slightly wrong. Inside around the “marking stick” (grease, wax, or whatever it is) is a sizable ridge that is quite uncommon on writing implements. There is also no grip section area.

photo-152

There are two ways I can describe this, either as a permanent (wetter) crayon, or a more slick grease pencil. Neither of those descriptions really tell you exactly what these things are. The inside substance comes in a pointy cone that is pretty useless. It’s very putty- or grease-like and when used the point becomes very flat very fast. It writes similarly to a crayon, in that it isn’t easy to control or sharpen. When the tip is flattened beyond a certain point, the base can be twisted to extend the point, but it can’t be retracted, so remember to not twist it too far out (that shouldn’t be a problem unless you’re an impatient reviewer like I am). The feeling it has is very slippery, and quite a bit of material comes off for not a lot of writing, but there seems to be quite a bit of it in the barrel, so running out should not be a major problem.

Performance is a bit disappointing. The white color doesn’t cover very well at all, meaning use in art as either correction or even to mix with other colors is very limited or would require re-application. It can be used as a covering to make things “hazy” but the coating is quite unpredictable. It likes to clump up in certain areas and barely cover others at all, meaning detail work also shouldn’t be done with it. As far a permanence goes, it is, but not wholly. I did testing (not just normal use) on metal and paper. Both were reasonably water-proof, on metal flame did nothing to it and on paper it did resist the flame but once the paper burned it did too (not that anything else would have happened). Then on the metal piece it stood up to WD-40, which has a knack for removing regular Sharpie, but was easily wiped away by isopropyl alcohol. I also suspect it could fairly easily be scraped off or crack easily on pliable surfaces. It does go on whether the surface is wet or dry as advertised and does dry in a fairly short amount of time for how tacky it is to begin with.

I would still consider this an art supply, and it can work well in mixed media, but really it is much more at home in the garage or the toolbox. The tip and lack of sharpening or controlling method means it works quite a bit better when marking large surfaces. It is “permanent” in that it’s hard to purposefully get off, but it doesn’t penetrate and won’t wear terribly well. It’s an interesting item, but certainly not a general use-one.

Blog 1-1-16 – New New Years’ Setup

Wow, it’s another new year already. Each year is just better than the last in terms of the amount of people viewing and enjoying my content, my interactions with people, and my own satisfaction in my work. Still, this is the first New Year’s in a while where I won’t be incredibly increasing my workload by announcing a couple of new comics. Indeed, this is the first year where I feel like I’m in a worse creative position than I was the year before. Meaning my update here will be rather tame, and have some of both the good and the bad.

First things first: let’s talk about comics. This year I’ve put 3 on hiatus, which has helped me, but I feel like it’s not as much as I really want to be doing. So this year I will be rescheduling the way things will be done. Instead of having 1 comic on weekdays and 3 each weekend day I will be doing 2 every day. The missing slots will be filled by Walking the Roosters increasing from 5 to 7 comics a week, as well as adding in a larger-format comic every week that could be a part of one of many stories. Also my Editorial comics, which I have not really been keeping up with, should hopefully fill in the remaining spot (if not, there will be something there, though). This new schedule will be viewable on the “weekly posting schedule” page shortly.

And now for the stuff not about comics. I will be ceasing to use most of the social media accounts that Dragon Co. uses for a period of time until I feel like they are relevant or are polished enough that I can be happy to look at them. This won’t be affecting everything: the main Dragon Co. Twitter and Facebook account/page will still be operational during this time, but Tumbr, secondary Facebook pages, and Google+ will not be active until the problems I am having with them can be resolved or there is demand for them to exist (which at the moment there is none, and I don’t foresee there being much for any but Tumblr until I can get things straightened out).

I will also be changing the “reviews” I have been doing (or trying to do) in the middle of the week. Instead I will be doing more of a short “Blog” post about one or a few of the many varied items in my collection (this is part of a larger project that I’m hoping to get off the ground). This might take longer to go into effect, as I haven’t been able to catch up on my written material as much as I would have hoped entering the New Year. In fact, I am very much behind in that regard and I will be working as diligently as I can to get caught up (but as one of my teachers always said “it is easier to keep up than catch up”). This process, which I optimistically thought would be finished by this time, might now take until the end of February to get resolved. But I do have every intention of catching up.

And that’s about what I’ve got. As always I hope you have enjoyed and continue to enjoy what I put out, and that you had a wonderful New Year’s Eve and will have a wonderful new year.

-Austin