Adrian Tomine has no "Short(er)comings"

Do you see yourself as having many similarities to Ben, the main male character in Shortcomings? How so?

We have the same glasses, and some of the same food allergies, but that's it. Absolutely no other similarities. None at all. (Especially since most reviews of the book point out how extremely unlikeable Ben is!)

Do you view relationships in a racialized way as Ben does? Some of his comments about white women are pretty intense. Do you think his perspective is common?

When I set out to write this book, it was important to me that I try my best to avoid anything that seemed like me, as a person, getting up on my soapbox and pontificating. I didn't set out to affect people's views in any specific way, other than, perhaps, to bring a variety of points of view to light, and do it in a somewhat entertaining way. And when I get asked questions like this, I'm afraid it runs the risk of obliterating my goals with the book. But suffice to say, I don't think any of Ben's views, regardless of one's opinion of them, are uncommmon or unheard of.

Geography plays a major role in Shortcomings, with two characters giving up San Francisco for New York and one returning to SF alone. Was this intentional and/or reflective of your personal situation?

I'm sorry if I sound like a broken record here, but my own personality and my own personal circumstances aren't really that important to one's reading of the book. I think it would be great if people could just approach this book as a straight work of fiction, without any real consideration of the person who created it. Maybe that's asking the impossible, I don't know.

How much of a role do you think place plays in your narratives? The "settings" feature on the Drawn & Quarterly site is great. Does place play a significantly larger role in graphic novels because of the visual element?

There were certain stylistic rules that imposed on myself for this book, and that included the rules of "no narration" and "no thought balloons" (both of which, I think, I'd relied on too heavily in the past). And to make a corny analogy here, I found that by taking away some of my tools, I had to make the remaining ones work that much harder. So what ended up happening is I drew this story in a fairly precise, detailed, and realistic style, which allowed me to convey things like characters' emotions and scene settings without words. The use of specific settings also helped me in the writing of the book. It was somehow easier to envision the scenes if I had an actual location in mind. In terms of comics or "graphic novels" in general, I wouldn't say there's any hard and fast rules about the significance of setting. Some of my favorite comics (like "Peanuts," for example) use setting very minimally, and obviously I wouldn't have it any other way.

The end of Shortcomings seems to leave the book open to a sequel--is that a possibility? What are some positive and negative aspects of working with the same characters again and again?

Yeah, everyone should keep an eye out for the sequel, "Shortercomings." And then if there's enough "consumer demand," I'll make it a trilogy with a third book entitled "Shortestcomings." In all seriousness...no, I don't think it's a story that needs to be continued. I know a lot of people find it kind of inconclusive, but I don't know if more of it would satisfy those people. I spent about five years working in a very prescribed, consistent manner on this book, so I'm really enjoying doing other things now.

Ben works in a movie theatre and seems to think this is just as legitimate a way to be involved in movies as making them would be. What's your perspective on the role of the critics vs. the creator?

Oh, that's a big can of worms, and obviously I'm approaching it from a fairly partisan angle. I guess in an ideal world, the term "critic" might refer more exclusively to someone like Lawrence Wechsler or Greil Marcus...extremely smart, erudite, and obsessive writers who spend more time illuminating and explicating works of art that they find interesting. I think in general people tend to take critics too seriously, give them too much credit. Especially in the internet era. Too much credence is given to people who, without this technology, would have no platform for their opinions, except for maybe carrying around a sandwich board on the street. And I should make it clear that I'm not trying to tear down the critics themselves...obviously everyone should be entitled to express their opinions, but like I said, I think the general public, and artists themselves, should take a lot of that with a bigger grain of salt. I always think it's funny when people say, "But I like reading reviews so I don't waste my money on a bad movie" or book or whatever. But then if you compare the reviews for a movie like "Jumper" with it's opening weekend box office, then it's pretty clear that most people either ignore reviews or even actively disobey them.

On a related note, would you like to adapt any of your work into a movie? Have you seen Persepolis? Any thoughts?

I'm not opposed to the idea of adapting my work to film, but it's not the reason why I made the comic, nor was it really on my mind at all during the process. Beyond that, I should probably remain tight-lipped on the topic.

There you have it, folks--Adrian and Ben are basically the same dude, Shortcomings will someday be a trilogy, and you can expect a movie this Christmas season. In all seriousness, though, expect some entertaining, incisive commentary and a brilliant movie at the Brattle tonight, if you go.

New Yorker cover from Gothamist, Shortcomings cover from Drawn & Quarterly