tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post936175551978069511..comments2009-02-17T19:27:03.159-08:00Kent Bhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11737362545673892485noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post-73368238568642316342009-02-17T19:27:00.000-08:002009-02-17T19:27:00.000-08:00I've seen the two questions before! It was in my social studies book in Elementary school! I had no clue what it was about at the time but I couldn't take my eyes off of it!Nikihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02975751161143205872noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post-43187863037531084792007-02-14T16:32:00.000-08:002007-02-14T16:32:00.000-08:00"Fitzgeraldian"?<BR/>High praise, indeed!<BR/>Eddie is the best natural storyteller in the business!Kent Bhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11737362545673892485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post-4599203256987143632007-02-03T18:18:00.000-08:002007-02-03T18:18:00.000-08:00Heh--Kent, your sudden expostulating in the last paragraph reaches a Fitzgeraldian pitch at the end--but what a great summation of Father Nast--who I knew of as a kid(but then, we had some old book on comics of the 1890s-1920s at my house in those years). The extent of my knowledge back then was 1) Nast=Boss Tweed's downfall, and 2) Nast invented the modern image of Santa Claus. It IS a damn shame that cartoonists don't have that sort of influence today, or any shot at it. Most editorial cartoons sure packed a wallop back then-Nast, Winsor, you name it; the tabloid press artists pulled no punches. I was looking at one of the collections of McCay's editorial single-panels at a comics shop the other day, and was both impressed and depressed to see how many of the themes he took on could be reprinted today with NO changes-still being completely true and relevant. Same goes with Nast. <br />If anything gets my goat it's the silly but prevalent belief that the Good Olde Days were populated by paper doll people in frills and quaint clothes, to a man naive and victorian. The reality as drawn by people such as Nast is something else, and deserves to be remembered and revered.Jennyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06668171465801333811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post-16075884548273702232007-02-01T17:06:00.000-08:002007-02-01T17:06:00.000-08:00thanks for posting that stuff, it's so awesome, ive been looking at a lot of daumier, so it's great to see another great artist of similar and different talents.akirahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04600165339319975023noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post-70703379466546110222007-01-25T15:01:00.000-08:002007-01-25T15:01:00.000-08:00hey kent. real nice blog you got going here. i knew a scant amount of thomas nast info before, so thanks for enlightening me. i like the dirty old man version of st. nick. good hanging out with you tuesday night too. c-ya.Garyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05478729308575046389noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post-87316364388004257672007-01-22T13:41:00.000-08:002007-01-22T13:41:00.000-08:00Wow! Nice blog!!!! I just discovered it! All of your entries so far have been extremely interesting!Eddie Fitzgeraldhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07729949238666234774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9015698702379885155.post-84716162344427413672007-01-20T16:21:00.000-08:002007-01-20T16:21:00.000-08:00Wow, we acttually learned about Nast in Media arts class, (in our ill-fated "animation" unit.) but we only saw his famous Tammany cartoon which isn't as good as these.<br /><br />These are great, but they're not as cartoony as later cartoons. (Whoah, an example of something getting better with time, amazing, isn't it?)Jorge Garridohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12832351250499740167noreply@blogger.com