I really used to respect Tom Preston. I thought he was a pretty cool dude! I’d wake up every morning to see if he had a new comic up, because sometimes they gave me some good advice!

Boy, was I wrong.

Over time, I began to realize that his comics were…changing.

They were changing into something strange, and, at the time, I couldn’t quite pinpoint what the change was. I thought I was just being rude, and that being negative about someone’s work was obnoxious.

It was only when I met someone on Tumblr that I caught on to the fact that Tom Preston was…well, let’s just say, a prick.

A lot of the things I can complain about with Tom Preston have already been said, so… Kids, don’t read SYAC.

It’s not good for you.

1 August 22 Permalink

On Talent:

I’ve never liked Tom Preston/Andrew Dobson. I don’t like wish-fulfillment strawman comics. I don’t like ‘humor’ where the punchline is just another can-you-relate moment in an attempt to appeal to everyone’s latent narcissism. And I don’t like artists who have been drawing for years yet have no discernable improvement to show for it. But I never really hated him until I got to that entry re: his feelings on his roommate and natural talent. Because my god, the arrogance of him. What a detestable, willfully ignorant fuckface.

Natural talent is a tricky beast to discuss. Even its existence is controversial, so just take this as my own personal perspective and not a universal rule. To start: yes, natural talent in art does exist, but Andrew Dobson is still deeply, harmfully wrong.

I say natural talent exists because I have and have always had some in art. Specifically, sculpture. Sculpture and sculpting had always come very easily to me. I’ve never had to think or try very hard to get something to look like I wanted it to when sculpting. I’ve been a competent but not masterful (and that is important) sculptor pretty much since I first touched clay. In comparison, drawing is something I don’t have any natural talent in. I’ve become a competent but not masterful artist, and that was through continuous practice, study, and hard work. I don’t have an interest in sculpting, so I’ve never really tried to improve there, but I try to improve as an artist every day, and seeing the results of my effort is so much more gratifying than seeing the results of my talent.

Having natural talent in one area and no talent in another has given me a perspective on how talent works that I like to call the marathon analogy. Basically, the road to being a masterful artist in any field is like running a marathon, with perfection as the finish line and natural talent as the head start. Some people begin at the starting line, and some people begin a mile down the track. Is it fair? No, but head start or no, everyone, and I mean everyone, can complete the marathon -if they just keep running-. If you don’t have natural talent, it may take you longer to complete the marathon, but you can do it. If you push yourself to run faster, you’ll get there faster. If you have natural talent and you don’t run, your mile head start won’t count for shit. And if you get tired of running and give up, you’ll get a grand total of nothing. But nobody starts at the finish line. Everyone has to run if they want to reach the end.

And along comes Andrew Dobson. Or, more specifically, he doesn’t come along. He is running in place a few miles in, and has been running in place for years. And as he watches other artists zip past him, running for all they’re worth, he has the sheer gall to say “oh, well of course they passed me, they had a head start.”

Because they’re actively improving, you dumb asshole! Because every day they’re confronting their weaknesses and fine-tuning their strengths. Because they look at their naturally talented roommates and see them as inspiration and goals to surpass, not convenient excuses for their deliberate refusal to dig themselves out of a rut.

And for the love of god, Dobson, learn to tell a joke. 

31 July 51 Permalink

Unsettling Similarities

Andrew Dobson is Chris-Chan.

Not literally, of course. That would imply that Chris-Chan had some form of artistic talent. But I think anyone reading this will understand what I mean by the above statement, especially after his most recent comic (at this point in time).

Andrew Dobson is Chris-Chan.

The fact is, Dobson draws many parallels and strong comparisons to our favorite autistic manchild. In fact, they’re so easily comparable that it’s tremendously scary. The fact that these comparisons can be made at all with any sort of seriousness is somewhat worrying at best and deeply unnerving at worst.

Andrew Dobson is Chris-Chan.

The first ones are the most obvious. They’re both… rotund, and in their thirties. One lives with his parents, one doesn’t (to my knowledge). They both use their art as their selling point; Chris-Chan draws his Sonichu comics in a futile attempt to create the ultimate media empire and ego-polis, Dobson draws his SYAC and his Alex Ze Pirate in a mediocre attempt at being a successful cartoonist.

But these are only the surface details. Sure, Dobson and Chris are both large artists in their thirties. Lots of people are artists. Lots of people are in their thirties. Some people are fat. But this goes deeper than that. Disturbingly deeper. Dobson and Chris, scarily enough, have very similar mindsets once you start comparing notes.

Let’s take a look at some examples.

———————————————————————————

1: Straw-manning

Dobson is a known straw-manner, using his SYAC comics as a vehicle in which to make his detractors look silly or illogical, and a pedestal to glorify himself, his opinions, and his thoughts on art, the world, and his audience. He ignores the criticism that his linework isn’t very good, his flat coloring is blah, and that his writing isn’t funny, thoughtful or even correct, and instead makes a mockery of the people who want to help him, in a low-key vein of good vs evil. His critics are evil, and he has to provide the snappy comeback to humble them, despite the fact that Dobson is, to most onlookers, not exactly in the position to do so.

Is this sounding familiar yet? Let me continue.

Chris-Chan is a known straw-manner, using his Sonichu comic as a vehicle in which to make his trolls, his enemies of his Love Quest, or anyone that bothers him in anyway look like an “evil, love-hating person”, and a pedestal to glorify himself, his opinions, his efforts at finding “true love”, and how he things the world should work. He ignores any and all criticism of his art or his life, and instead uses the comic to make a mockery of his critics, in a blatant vein of good vs evil. Trolls are evil love-hating people, and CWC has to be the one to defeat them, despite the fact that to most onlookers, he is not exactly in the position to say anything about them.

The parallels here are uncanny. Both Dobson and CWC pride themselves on their art, and use it as a way to make themselves look good and their critics look bad, even though said critics have valid points - Dobson has indeed stagnated since his college days (though he seems to be trying to do different stuff), and CWC… well, he needs to stop being CWC.

———————————————————————————

2: Comfort Zone

Dobson likes to think of himself as a “professional artist”, and makes tutorials and provides help to his young fans who look up to him. However, his advice and tutorials are infamously bad, either being incorrect, outdated, or simply a bunch of shortcuts. He’s known for not trying to improve or branch out in his art, and this is what has caused his ability to draw to slowly wither away. It’s not gone yet, but he hasn’t improved at all since college. He’s actually grown worse. He hasn’t been able to move on from his college days and try new things, and this is his undoing.

CWC likes to think of himself as a role model for people, and has given advice to many, through videos and mailbags, who either look up to him or simply want to know his thoughts. However, his advice is infamously bad, mostly being incorrect, hypocritical, or completely insane. He’s known for not trying to improve or branch out in his art (or any other aspect of his life), and this is what has allowed him to stay an adult child for the past decade. He hasn’t been able to move on in his life since his high school graduation, and this is his undoing.

Both of them need to start doing one thing to give themselves any hope of improvement: grow more open-minded and adapt. Their unwillingness to adapt and do, try, or think something new and different is what makes them so unlikeable - they want to keep staying the same forever, but such a concept is futile in a constantly-changing world.

———————————————————————————

3: Insensitivity and Ego

Dobson’s general insensitivity and his ego are fairly well-known, and have been augmented by his recent comic, where he compares (yes, no matter how you try to justify or reword it, Dobson, that’s essentially what you did) the tragic theater TDKR shooting to such horrific events such as Jar Jar Binks and the CD-i Games (which are actually rather charmingly bad, but that’s off-topic). His selfishly-skewed ego is what perpetuates his straw-man comics, and is also what makes him unable to accept, and grow from, the criticism he receives.

CWC’s insensitivity and ego are legendary. Anyone who’s taken a quick peek into the CWCki can attest to that. He cannot comprehend how the death of another loved one is not the same as him losing his dog. He cannot comprehend why people call him fat, naive, a bad artist and a lazy asshole when he’s obviously the pinnacle of humanity. He mocked the 9/11 tragedy in an attempt to show how “weak” one of his critics was. When this backfired on him, he made an insincere apology video, where a picture of a birthday cake had the towers alit as candles, and saw no problem with this. This was not a troll idea, either - he did this all of his own accord. His selfishly-skewed ego is what perpetuates his existence, and is also what makes him unable to accept, and grow from, the criticism he receives.

This, front and center, is the biggest and most worrying comparison. CWC’s ego is the result of the combination of bad parenting, autism, and traits such as inherent laziness, negative nature and pathological lying. While they are not excuses for his ego, they do provide a reason why he has one in the first place.

However, Dobson has no such reasons. To current knowledge, he is not autistic. To current knowledge, he was not raised badly. He is lazy (as his constant art shortcuts show), he has lied often before (“useless degree”), and his mean comments towards many well-meaning people and his past as CattyN show his negative attitude.

———————————————————————————

So what does this all boil down to?

Andrew Dobson is Chris-Chan.

Well, not literally. It is simply a short essay comparing Dobson to Chris-Chan, meant to highlight the fact that they are quite alike.

Andrew Dobson is Chris-Chan.

To some, this might be overdoing it. Yes, Dobson and Chris-Chan are both selfish, egotistical assholes who are variously bad at art (Chris more so than Dobson), but Chris has a zillion other problems that Dobson doesn’t. But does that make these comparisons invalid? You can form your own conclusion about that. But as for me…

Andrew Dobson is Chris-Chan.

30 July 45 Permalink

Aftermath

My apologies for the lack of activity again. Especially for a time in which Dobson has… pissed off a lot of people. Again with the piece I previously reblogged (with permission, of course) it points out why that comic is problematic. The general message he was trying to portray was understandable - it was the comparisons he made. Those were the problems with his comic.

Even after making that journal apology, I am actually not too proud of him putting up the Butthurt report form as his deviantART webcam. And obviously he put that up as a response to the recent shit he’s getting. So I’m not too sure it’s safe to assume that he’s completely understanding to why people are offended.

Even worse is that we see the mentality of his fan base. These are the people that say “oh people shouldn’t care, people die everyday!” These are the same people Dobson gives his advice to and, to be honest, I think his thinkings are rubbing off on them.

29 July 9 Permalink

MY INEVITABLE TWO CENTS ON PRESTON’S LATEST COMIC

zloi-medved:

Tom Preston’s recent comic, “Internet Prefaces”, has earned some (much-deserved) controversy. In case you don’t want to read it, which I understand, Preston makes a comic about the theatre shooting in Aurora, Colorado.

Let me repeat that.

Preston makes a comic about the theatre shooting in Aurora, Colorado.

To be exact, he uses the shooting as a tool to get up on his soapbox and complain about things that bother him. Which may be even worse.

If you feel like this comic isn’t a big deal, you need to think about the circumstances of this issue. We are talking about an event that happened a week ago. People are still recovering from this on a superficial level, but most who were directly involved may never recover. Simply bringing up the tragedy in a comic so soon after the event isn’t a problem, as long as it is handled with the due sensitivity and respect the issue deserves. Everything from the language to the art Preston has chosen to use in covering this topic, however, is grossly offensive.

The Nerdfighter reference of the internet being full of “giant squids of anger” is problematic. A massacre that happened a week ago isn’t the right subject to be breaking out in-jokes in. His Peanuts/chibi art style isn’t much better, since it brings a light-hearted brevity to the comic that isn’t remotely suitable considering the subject material.

Preston has been criticised for this comic, and his response is simple;

I guess I wasn’t clear enough in my message. I’m not surprised, but it does kinda defeat my point having to write a preface to explain it. The following post expresses it very clearly though:

yeah, it was a tragedy people, but it doesn’t represent the movie, and never should. it should just represent how messed up this world can be.

You wanna talk about the messed up world, go ahead, but the point being made is stop derailing the topic on hand because something has any relation to it whatsoever. not talking about recent events that occurred during a movie while talking about that same movie is not insensitive, why drag the negative into the conversation anyways? making jokes about the shooting, that would be insensitive. go after people doing that, not people who just don’t see the need to bring a conversation to something that really has nothing with the subject at hand, or dwell on the negative.

I am in NO WAY saying you shouldn’t feel bad about the tragic events that happened last week, nor suggesting, inferring, or recommending that you shouldn’t/don’t CARE about what happened. And I am most definitely not saying that you shouldn’t offer your help and support to those injured in the event.

The sad thing is, the point Preston makes in that response is a good one. The media coverage of the event has been problematic, at best. The way the media tends to over-publicise tragedies like this gives justification to the people responsible. For better or worse, it immortalises them.

Sadly, anything Preston has to say to that effect is moot after he makes a comic that specifically brings up the tragedy and then trivialises it by comparing it to movie and game events like:

• Emo-Parker in Spider-Man 3
• The “subliminal messages in Disney movies” conspiracy
• The lack of games for the PS3
• The CD-i Zelda games, and my personal favourite
• Jar-Jar Binks.

If Tom Preston cannot understand why putting an intentional massacre of a theatre of people on the same level as a badly designed character in a sputtering franchise, then we have a serious fucking problem on our hands. A serious problem.

At his worst, Preston has been a wailing man-child that gives bad advice to budding young artists. But this comic and fan response has catapulted him to a whole new level, from “bad artist” to “insensitive bastard” and it needs to be brought up.

Again.

And again.

And again.

And again.

Until he does three very important things:

1. Acknowledges that while he may not find what he has done offensive or problematic, there are people who have been offended and hurt by it.
2. Apologise for what he has done and to the people he hurt with this comic, publicly.
3. Seriously consider from now on what he decides puts on a public sphere (and when) to avoid making this exact same horrible mistake ever again.

Of course, this will never happen because of Preston’s largest problem - his Prestonites; his army of screaming sycophants that he actively encourages to attack naysayers. Because as long as there are people supporting him, supporting this comic, and, best of all, saying comments to the tune of (direct quote), “Totally! Who even cares?”, he will continue to justify his actions to himself.

A moment of silence for Tom Preston, who has transcended “shitty artist” and reached the fabled ranks of “shitty human being”.

28 July 156 bullshitcockroach Permalink

PT. 2

zloi-medved:

Full disclosure: I live in Australia, so we haven’t had the same exposure to this event that America has had. However, one of my closest friends lives in Colorado, so he has experienced a bit more than a “tangential” backlash from this event.

I tend to be fairly relaxed about things, even things that hit me quite personally, such as things concerning sexual assault and disability or mental illness. I often allow people quite a lot of leeway immediately after they say or do anything offensive, and reserve serious judgement until I see how they respond to criticisms of their actions. I feel that the way people make up for their mistakes, rather than the mistakes themselves, speak the most about their character.

On a lesser scale, it is to this end that Preston has frustrated me. His reaction to criticisms concerning his art is almost always surly, if not outright hostile (though I will give him credit in that he seems to be slowly and begrudgingly accepting and even seeking critique of his art more and more). However, the way he has reacted to people’s criticisms of this comic has disturbed me. However much I ranted and raved about Preston, I always separated my hate for him as an artist from my feelings toward him as a person. I cannot say that I would ever have expected this sort of stubborn response from him, though in retrospect, it is just like him.

The more you criticise his actions, the harder he digs in his heels and plays the victim. No matter how calmly I try to spoon-feed him the issue, it’s unlikely I’m going to see any sort of resolution from this I can accept.

Neverthless, I’m dumb enough to try.

28 July 19 bullshitcockroach Permalink

Widespread Foulness

Hello, recently I came upon foreverpandering’s video rant on his shared and personal disagreements with the artist in question, Andrew Dobson http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT4h86Ns1Cs&feature=plcp. I found myself amazed at the amount of effort put into this video and I even felt a bit bad for Dobson. That did not last long. A couple minutes in pandering brings up some replies from Dobson himself, replies to people who to the time to try and help him improve his own art with no  reward other than seeing their advice put into practice. His aggressive responses to critiques surprised me but the punchline was when they defended the critique by saying they wanted to help and Dobson accused them for using a non instigator approach as a shield. 

My apologies if this blog is primarily for illustrative artists to funnel their hate and general disapproval of Dobson but after researching this guy for a bit I found myself astounded at his response to anyone who doesn’t cherish his art. I am a musician a percussionist to be specific in what I play(piano included) but I enjoy composing a fair bit more than performing a prepared piece and although I consider my participation in orchestral performances and accepting jobs more of a hobby than a profession, there is one thing that I will always take home with me and that is the opinion of anyone willing to tell me how they thought I played.

The talent of a musician is arguably completely reliant on their ability to adapt to a style out of their comfort zone and adjust their own techniques for quality sake and appeal of the audience. We are entertainers, not celebrities so if something sounds a bit off to the audience, especially the non musically trained ear, something needs to be changed. Given that drawn art is not so easily critiqued by the inexperienced masses, professional artists by the dozens critique Dobson’s art and he responds as though they have no prior experience and, god forbid, might even be better than the all high and mighty Andrew Dobson. 

I strongly disagree Dobson

If I had 30 seconds to spend with a classically trained percussionist who told me in that time frame things that could be improved upon with a piece I have written I would treat it like the law and even produce a second piece to compare to the original based on his advice. But I am not so lucky and probably never will be. 

Everyday more and more experienced artists attempt to help the brick wall Dobson has put around his art and it angers me that such ample advice is being thrown away. He has no idea how lucky he is that anyone is willing to critique him, and after his response to them Andrew Dobson might as well be a Leprechaun considering popular artists WANT to help him.

Call me jealous, and that isn’t sarcasm I am riddled with jealousy that such experience is wasted on this individual and the fact that people like this exist in any art form makes composition seem all the more fruitless. I sincerely love writing and performing and I hope that any aspiring artist of any form will do their best to not follow the lead of Dobson. 

19 July 23 Permalink

Negative Critiques

adobsonart:

I’ve gotten a lot of people telling me that art critiques are only supposed to be negative and you’re never supposed to say anything positive, because that is equal to ass-kissing. How very sad and depressing life must be for those people, never being able to enjoy positive reinforcement. And how horrible for those young budding artists who are still not confident with their art, being told nothing but how much they’ve failed. Has the internet soured our perceptions so much that the mere idea of saying something nice must be taken with such incredulity?

Nobody is telling you that critiques have to be completely negative in order to be effective. You’re twisting their words with your shallow understanding.

What they’re actually saying is that critique doesn’t always have to compliment their advice with a pat on the back. It’s not necessary to follow criticism with “aw I’m sorry that this will hurt your feelings, here have a candy to make you feel better, champ!” 

Even worse is that you choose to vilify them by saying “BUT WHAT IF YOU TELL THIS TO BUDDING ARTISTS”. No. Dobson, stop dragging unnecessary factors into this just to make people go easy on you.

You graduated from an art school with a BFA. What are you doing, trying to redefine critique on the internet? What have you done with your BFA?  Your demo reels contain recycled materials from when you graduated and you choose to blame 3-D animation, flash, and the Koreans for your lack of success in the animating industry.

19 July 84 adobsonart-deactivated20121031 Permalink