I was a little surprised when I checked my e-mail this afternoon. Rahim from Tabrizcartoon sent me a link to Irancartoon website. It was in Persian (I guess) but I saw immediately that it was about the interview I did with Julian Pena Pai about ‘Plagiarism and Similarities in cartooning’ .
The interview should be published in the Flemish cartoon magazine Scherper in September. It is part of a bigger dossier with other interviews and background information about the topic.
In my written interview with Julian I wrote:
“If the order of questions seems no right any more or questions became irrelevant because you already answered it in a previous answer, don’t worry to change it. If I might have some further questions after I’ve seen your answers, I’ll come back to you”
So Tuesday evening at 10:30 I got the answers back. I thanked Julian and read them a first time. I saw that Julian did not answer at 2 of my questions:
I have the impression that you are a little more moderated about the words you use when you show the world some of these simalirities. You seem more often to use terms as
coincidences and history of ideas. Am I right and if so how come?
In an interview with Irancartoon you said that you allready made some ennemies by doing what you do? And, as you know, I personaly also had some problems in the past, not on what you are doing, that I find indeed interesting from a cartoon art history perspective, but about how you treated some cartoonists, cartoon organizers and jury members. It sometimes felt as a personal vendetta, that was fought in public. Can you understand?
I still had some time to write the article so I did have time for reflection about some specifications I wanted and to adapt the questions a bit so it became a fluent interview.
But today, less than 2 days after I got the answers myself, the interview was already on several cartoon blogs and sites. Without an introduction by myself about why this interview was organised and context information, or without mentioning that some (critical) questions, my own opinion, didn’t get any answer.
I am rather sure that this was not meant to be, that it was all a misunderstanding. But I don’t feel happy about it.
First of all because the interview was for the readers of ‘Scherper’ at the first place, the interview was conducted with them in mind. So I find it important that they have the opportunity to read it first. That’s why the publication of the article on this blog was planned in September too.
And I am not happy because the article was not finished yet: no professional introduction, the intro was written by Julian and not by myself. You don’t get any information about the context of the interview and the text is not fluent, my questions are not well formulated in English (because it was for translation in Dutch) and some important questions did not get any answer, while the reader don’t know anything about it.
So I hope everybody will enjoy reading the article next September. Because it is great!
I thought that Julian should have the chance to explain to the cartoon world why he does what he does. I hoped that people, myself in the first place, would understand it a little bit more. With this information it is up to every cartoonist/cartoonlover to decide if they feel it is something good or not.