Chester Brown (1) (1960–)

I was at the bookstore telling a friend how I never seem to like graphic novels*, and then I randomly picked this one up off the table and got sucked in. It's a non-fiction account of how the author decided to start paying for sex. The writing is matter-of-fact and rational, and Brown makes a reasoned case for his decision. He's very, very strongly opposed to marriage and to making long-term commitments. I disagree with him completely, but it was interesting to read his views. There are show more numerous appendices at the end of the book where he discusses various issues in more detail.

Maybe the thing that surprised me most, and that most made me realize how completely different our world-views were, was when he explained how a certain burden was lifted after he first had sex with a prostitute. In the past, he says, "Every time I saw an attractive woman, I wanted to walk up to her and initiate some sort of interaction. I usually lacked the confidence to do so. Those frequent inner battles led to a lot of tension. I rarely acted, which added to the burden because I'd condemn myself for failing to do anything and for missing potential opportunities." And so on. This is what really helped me understand why he feels the way he does about sex and relationships, and why it can seem rational while still being completely different from my own attitudes: I can't imagine attractiveness being the main factor in deciding whether to initiate contact with a stranger. I don't have much interest in interacting with random strangers in general; I'm more likely to talk to people because we're participating in some shared activity--a meetup, or a dinner with mutual friends. I'm not interested in developing a relationship based solely on how someone looks. But if looks are the primary thing that he cares about, and that's what makes him want to get involved with someone, and he doesn't really care about whether they have anything meaningful in common (because it seems pretty unlikely that an attractive stranger on the street would be a match personality-wise), then it makes sense just to hire a prostitute and be done with it.

So, I found it interesting and worthwhile to see a different perspective on the world (although I did sometimes find it a bit awkward to get this perspective in graphic-novel form, because some parts were, well, graphic). In many ways I found it sad to read about Brown's extreme cynicism, but it also made me think, which is always good. I think I'll read Brown's comic-strip biography of Louis Riel at some future point. show less

Chester Brown has a long history of adapting bible stories and frequenting prostitutes. In this volume he combines his two passions, using bible stories to help rationalize his sexual activity. He's not the first guy to justify his actions through bible studies, but he may be the first to get a moderately entertaining graphic novel out of the effort. I may not buy it all, but his interpretations are certainly thought provoking.

Chester Brown's paean to the joys of prostitution (hiring them, not being one; I suspect if he wrote from the latter point of view this would have been a very different book) is sort of an odd experience. The narrative was engrossing, believe it or not, and Chester is a more appealing character than he really should be, considering that he seems emotionally detached from everything and everyone in the world. But Brown's philosophy feels ill thought-out even though he goes on and on and ON show more about it; while he purports to weigh the pros and cons at great (and I do mean great) length, he never seems to wind up saying much. He works hard to dress up his maunderings on prostitution and turn them into a Platonic disquisition on the nature of love and the morality of the sex trade, but they really don't add up to anything more than "I think prostitution is a really good idea because I enjoy hiring prostitutes because it's a lot better than romance or monogamy." Well, ok, if you say so, brah!

Brown also elides over a lot of stuff that made me do a triple take. For example, in one sequence, he's having sex with a prostitute who keeps saying "Ow! Ow! Ow!" and who, according to Brown, appears to be in pain. She tells him that he isn't hurting her, but it's obvious that he is. He thinks to himself, "It's kind of a turn-on to me that she's in pain, but still, I think I'll cut this session short" or words to that effect. This experience gives him no pause whatsoever, even though it suggests that she might be unwilling or exploited, or both. Other than noting that her pain is turning him on, though (blecch), he doesn't appear to give it a second thought, other than to note that she probably isn't involved in human trafficking because, um, well, it's not clear why. Maybe because her accent is Canadian?

And whether he means to or not, Brown dehumanizes the prostitutes he portrays, as he never shows their faces or any of their physical features. The reader sees them mostly from behind, and he draws them all the same: thin with long dark hair. Brown claims that he used this technique to protect the women's privacy. Yeah, right -- because Brown's artistic technique has such verisimilitude. Give me a break. Brown's photo is in the back of the book, and I would never in a million years have recognized him if I had only seen his own drawings of himself; he draws himself as a generic dude with an oval head and glasses. So he couldn't have drawn the women in a similarly generic way? Anyone who's read Scott McCloud's "Understanding Comics" is going to see Brown's explanation for the rationalization really is.

Brown also spends the better part of the story deriding romantic love and monogamy, dismissing them as, among other things, "possessive love." Fine -- that's not necessarily an indefensible position. But by the end of the book, he's involved in -- you guessed it -- a monogamous relationship with one of the women he hired. He indulges in another paragraphs-long expostulation to explain this fact away -- something about how he's not a jealous person so it's different when he does it -- but his handwaving doesn't do much to obviate the fact that he's basically just revealed that the entire book is more or less an exercise in hypocrisy.

And finally, anyone who says he has "respect and affection" for Dave Sim has just lost me entirely.

So, three stars because I was riveted in the way I'd be riveted by a cobra about to strike, but I'll admit I kind of hate myself for it. show less

Witty and Informative

Both revered and despised, Louis Riel brings back all the emotions of ethnic nationalism in Canada. For one of the most complex and intriguing historical figures in Canadian history, Chester Brown does an admirable job in not only recounting the story of Louis Riel but also the major events of that period.

To be clear, Brown's version of events is biased by his own admission and certainly some elements were invented to fit the comic-strip. An example of this is the show more conversation between Lord Granville and Sir John A. Macdonald about sending troops to apprehend Riel. Brown admits that such a conversation never actually took place but certainly Macdonald did have to obtain permission from mother Britain.

Another interesting event to me was the meeting between Riel and then US President Ulysses S. Grant in 1875 to discuss plans to invade Manitoba. There were certainly some sympathies from some Americans such as in Minnesota who were pro-annexation but as Brown correctly points out Grant was in no position at the time to risk war, especially since the country was still amidst the reconstruction following the costly civil war.

Perhaps most controversial is Brown's characterization of Macdonald. The father of confederation, Brown portrays Macdonald as a ruthless conniving egomaniac hell-bent on expanding the railway (with kickbacks), ethnic cleansing of the Metis, and making an example out of Riel. Based on the sources that we have now, I would have to agree with Brown. Macdonald was a brilliant politician, he out-witted all his opponents including the British, the Americans and the natives. Macdonald was a master manipulator of which there has been no match since.

I've read a few comic-strip novels and I think that in certain situations they work extremely well. In this case, I would have to agree, the illustrations along with Brown's wit and choice of dialogue make this both an accurate historical representation and enjoyable reading. show less