21 Responses to “Filipino Komiks Swipe File”

1. plsburydoughboy on December 28th, 2010 8:16 am

   I think it would be productive to find out from the komiks veterans themselves about this art swiping business. Of course, we can conjecture at this moment that the world did not pay attention to copyright and intellectual property issues back then as they did today, and it’s reasonable to assume that these artists probably copied from other sources for practice (not for work) all the time, but really, we need to hear it from them themselves.

2. Gerry Alanguilan on December 28th, 2010 8:36 am

   Unfortunately, a lot of them are no longer with us. Whatever’s left is their work, and the legacy that it’s left us. And obviously, some of these were copied, not for practice, but for work and for publication. The fact that the few samples I’ve seen are unsigned seem to point to some sort of awareness of what they were doing.

   a few veterans have chimed in about this issue in previous public and private discussions. I get the general impression that in pre-Internet times, they had no idea that their work would be seen so widely today.

3. Jose Mari Lee on December 28th, 2010 8:38 am

   Gerry:

   Oh? He-he. Akala ko, alam mo nang kinopya iyan kaya inilagay mo? Noon ko pa alam ito, at napakarami pang kinodigo na kapag ibinulgar natin (as in ipinagtabi sa orig) ay tuluyan nang magiging TUBOG SA GINTO (with apologies to Mars Ravelo) ang tinaguriang “Golden Age ng Tagalog komiks”. Subali’t nguni’t datapuwa’t… magagawa ba nating baguhin ang history nito at tawagin natin itong: “Copper Age of Tagalog Komiks?”

   Here’s a statement that might irk many artists in the old komiks industry: “Most of them were GREAT TECHNICIANS, but NOT NECESSARILY… artists.”

   Aminin man natin o hindi, ito ang masakit na katotohanan. Personally, mas gusto ko pa sigurong PATULUGIN NA LAMANG ANG ASONG MALAON NANG NAHIHIMBING. Pero sa iba, kung ang paniniwala ay kailangang gisingin ang asong ito sa kanyang pagkakagupiling, well, so be it. After all, if we really want to search for the truth, the good, and the beautiful – we have to unravel the WYSYWYG :) (and we can thank Apple Computer for perfecting XEROX/PARC wysywyg in its infancy). He-he.

   At doon sa mga nabubuhay pang mga artists na galing sa tinaguriang “Golden Age”, lo siento, señores, pero muchos de nuestros colegas hicieron esta práctica muy mala, despues, tengo que decir la verdad. Kinakailangang sabihin ko ito sa Kastila para hindi masyadong nakatutulig pakinggan kaysa Tagalog.

   At doon sa talagang mga gumawa ng original… wa na ako ma-sey, bow ako sa inyo. Nabibilang kayo doon sa may mga tunay GOLDEN TALENT, hindi tanso, hindi puwit ng baso. Mabuhay kayo.

4. adam! on December 28th, 2010 9:42 am

   I really don’t understand or can’t sympathise wholeheartedly with the guilt associated with art plagiarism, especially when it is elevated along the exaggerated levels of how Catholics deal with contraception. Even if we set aside the idea that art plagiarism is not a crime, swiping as practiced by pre-war/babyboomer komikeros can easily be rationalised when the details of the situation of komiks production of that era are more considered, namely:

   a) these were illustrations for weekly periodicals, and

   b) the artists saw their jobs as jobs, not as art.

   Meaning, as with any job that demands high production at such a short time, standards and practices were not particularly “high” in komiks (up until, I would say, the current resurgence of the medium as a cottage industry) – it’s akin to expecting poetry from newspapers: it’s there from time to time, but not from authorial intent, and finding them says more about us as readers than them as artists – and so, as with any job that demands high production at such a short time, shortcuts were applied whenever possible, one of which is what we now call swiping.

   And I’m willing to wager that if we had the same conditions of production that they had back then – a complete komix in a week, fully-edited and -written and -drawn and -inked and -coloured and -lettered and -published week in week out for years and years and years without only occasionally missing a beat – there’d be swiping, too.

   In short: why the guilt? Why whitewash? Swiping is as much a legit product of the practices of the tradition as much as off-set halftoning is, as much as Kenkoy is. We should all talk about it, and we should all talk about it properly. To always see swiping as the Mortal Art Sin is to not talk about it properly if at all, which can only mean delaying the progress of our understanding of art’s processes.

5. adam! on December 28th, 2010 9:52 am

   “I really don’t understand or can’t sympathise wholeheartedly with the guilt associated with art plagiarism, especially when it is elevated along the exaggerated levels of how Catholics deal with contraception.”

   Or the gradeschool bickering, I hasten to add, as demo’d by Jose Mari Lee in his first comment. It is very unfortunate that most people react to the topic like this.

6. Gerry Alanguilan on December 28th, 2010 10:32 am

   I think there’s a definite line that separates what is legitimate process of art (such as being influenced with your influences bleeding through and sifted through your own unique vision as an artist), and outright copying another artist’s work. It’s debatable as to where this line lies, but I doubt it can ever lie with something that can be measured to everyone’s satisfaction. It will always be a matter of debate. Is it homage? influence, or outright plagiarism?

   It can be said that Filipino artists doing manga are doing it out of influence. The spoof of Marvel and Jack Kirby covers you did I consider homage because what is characteristically Adam David still shines through. But the example in this post is to me definitely plagiarism because all I see are line for line tracing of the work of another artist. I think there’s no excuse for it. Not deadlines, not whatever conditions of production, not editorial policy or whatever justification is used to cloud what is truly going on: The work of one artist was claimed to be created by another artist.

   I understand that in this new Internet age where thievery is common, standard operating procedure, justified and even deemed right and correct, it’s not surprising to me how plagiarism can ever be considered legitimate. I feel as though there has been a seismic shift in the world’s morality and I was one of the last to know.

7. adam! on December 28th, 2010 10:51 am

   “I feel as though there has been a seismic shift in the world’s morality and I was one of the last to know.”

   I don’t see it as an issue of morality. Morality implies a qualitative judgment imposed as objective as it is seen as accepted by a majority, when as history shows, morality is very subjective. If morality is applied to art – yet another arguably subjective topic – that means Michelangelo’s David ought to be hidden somewhere, or be shown with a fig leaf on his crotch (an old example, I know, and I apologise).

   I don’t see art plagiarism as an issue of morality: art doesn’t care about our moral standards (ie, Hitler was a failed artist and the swastika is a Hindu symbol of reincarnation flipped horizontally). I see art plagiarism as a byproduct and practice of a certain system of production. It’s like seeing piracy and torrenting as the third world’s answer to the first world’s cultural imperialism. Which is why I keep insisting – which is why I will keep on insisting – that people talk about it more responsibly, more acutely, with much awareness.

   In short: wag ka sana ma-guilty kapag tingin mo kailangan siyang pag-usapan. And most definitely, we really need to talk about it.

8. Gerry Alanguilan on December 28th, 2010 11:03 am

   I think we are talking about it. And I’m telling you what I think. I’m by no means asking anyone else to agree. But no amount of talking will sway me from thinking that the example I posted here is plagiarism. This is not a grey area to me. In my conscience of what is right and wrong, I know deep in my gut that this is wrong.

9. Jose Mari Lee on December 28th, 2010 11:59 am

   Grade school bickering? Ha-ha-ha! COPYING ANOTHER PERSON’S WORK IS STEALING! My man, It IS wrong! Plain and simple. This is not elementary school of reading, writing, and ‘rithmetic. It is serious stuff!

   Well, if one thinks that stealing is moral,
   then there is no more point to argue about this rampant & prevalent copying in the old RP comics industry where I used to be part of.

   And it’s not only drawings that were copied.
   Even stories or serials were copied. A very blatant example of this was a sci-fi serial in Atlas which was copied from a best seller, CHARIOTS OF THE GODS? I can enumerate very many serials copied from this and that but if the younger generation would not listen, why would I insist?

   If one was not part of the industry when cooruption were happening there, you better listen to what the people who were there has to say, because they were the ones who saw the truth first hand.

   “I see art plagiarism as a byproduct and practice of a certain system of production. It’s like seeing piracy and torrenting as the third world’s answer to the first world’s cultural imperialism.”

   Huh?! What the heck are you talking about? The Philippines was CORDIALLY INVITED to join the Berne’s copyright, but the country had rejected it. While it’s true that not only komiks was copied in RP, even songs, movies, et al. RP has a history of aping the west – no wonder in the 1950s, the western nations called the Filipinos APES because the Filipinos in those times aped everything from the west, including the bad stuff! (to be exact: “Filipinos are like monkeys!” – this was terrible, but this comment was openly expressed by the west!) Poor soul, the product of my sinful earth! Until the younger Filipinos wake up and smell the BARAKO COFFEE that copying everything from the west will not take them to a higher pedestal, you, the younger generation will carry all the burden and will never be treated seriously by the world at large.

   When the topic of COPYING is talked about, it should be talked about as an immoral thing, because is it akin to STEALING. And I totally agree with Alanguilan. You, the younger ones, should not do the same mistakes that the previous generation had done. BE ORIGINAL.

   Meanwhile, let me put my dog to sleep.

10. John Amor on December 28th, 2010 2:55 pm

    I feel that Art Plagiarism isn’t as much an issue of general human morality as much as it is an issue of business ethics. Whoever this guy was, he swiped someone else’s work so he himself could get paid.

    Does that make him a bad artist? Probably not.

    Does that make him a bad artiste? Sure.

    But more than anything, it makes him someone who apparently didn’t care about who was getting ripped off as much as just getting a job done. Getting paid. There may be a moral dilemma if you get into Art as Art, but as it is… the parameters of this discussion seem to be limited (on the surface) to Art as a Business.

11. Leinil yu on December 28th, 2010 3:53 pm

    I’m more disturbed by the “let’s keep this hush hush cause it brings shame” mentality. It is what it is. Tho I”m confident that these instances doesn’t taint the legacy “golden age” of filipino comics, If it turned out that 100% of our beloved golden age art are swiped, then perhaps we don’t deserve such recognition in the first place. we ought to come clean. maybe we should return the trophy.

    I highly doubt these revelations will diminish what the pinoy greats have done tho.

    @ Adam!, I can see your point. People can/will cheat in different circumstances and depending on the chances of being caught.
    But conflating swiping with halftones/rendering techniques is just plain wrong and tells me you are not a creator. I am not saying that I’m absolutely above cheating, I’m human after all, but I don’t delude myself by seeing swiping as just another legitimate technique, like using halftones. It’s cheating. let’s call it what it is.

    re: Art as a moral issue. Art is a property. Is stealing is a moral issue? Is taking food off someone’s table a moral issue? The ability to profit from your creation is diminished when someone else claims ownership of it or have already been paid for it, or if someone can produce comparable work by simply tracing over your lines and charging less for it. It’s true for illustrations and is more felt in the music industry.

12. John Amor on December 28th, 2010 6:38 pm

    ***Hi Gerry, I apologize if this comment double-posts. My internet has been skipping all day.***

    I feel that Art Plagiarism isn’t as much an issue of general human morality as much as it is an issue of business ethics. Whoever this guy was, he swiped someone else’s work so he himself could get paid.

    Does that make him a bad artist? Probably not.

    Does that make him a bad artiste? Sure.

    But more than anything, it makes him someone who apparently didn’t care about who was getting ripped off as much as just getting a job done. Getting paid. There may be a moral dilemma if you get into Art as Art, but as it is… the parameters of this discussion seem to be limited (on the surface) to Art as a Business.

    Don’t get me wrong. I, like many of my contemporaries (I hope), frown upon this sort of thing. But I see it more as a character flaw (on the part of the artist) than a social evil.

13. adam! on December 28th, 2010 6:41 pm

    “… conflating swiping with halftones/rendering techniques is just plain wrong and tells me you are not a creator”

    Ah, so does this mean that only artists – or to use your own term, creators – can really talk about the issue, that only artists/creators have the gravitas to weigh in on the issue? What does “creator” even mean, anyway?

    Again, I make an effort not to see art as a moral issue. Doing so throws wrenches into what can be a more productive discussion.

14. Leinil Yu on December 29th, 2010 1:48 am

    edit:

    @ Adam!

    Let’s drop the moral issue for now. I’m not judging the artists of the past with today’s standards. I could be that very same artist had I been around at that time, paid very little and pressed for time, and had no way of predicting the coming of the internet. who knows?

    Seriously, If you actually are part of the creative process, or have created/drawn something, you’d know that swiping is NOT a legitimate tool/technique such as half toning or using a new style of rendering. It’s not part of the usual creative process.

    It’s like saying planting evidence is just another legitimate detective work.

15. Jose Mari Lee on December 29th, 2010 1:50 am

    Let me just reiterate here that despite the copying in those days, NOT ALL artists of the “golden age” did it.

    By the same token, I will also say that the copy cats didn’t only copy the foreign artists, they also copied many artists of the so-called “golden age” with the blessing of the publishers! And this was what made the quality of the komiks go down the drain.

    Here’s a quick list of who were copied according to decade:

    • 1950s: COCHING was copied almost by everyone

    • Early 1960s: REDONDO, ALCALA, ZUÑIGA, RODRIGUEZ & AGUIRRE became the toast of the decade. Aguirre, being the one with the most beautiful drawings, became the most popular in dramatic stories. Redondo & Alcala for action genres, Zuniga for drama-horror-comedy, Rodriguez for period stories (who was later on replaced by Alex Niño)

    Early 1970s, when the established artists went to America, the ones left became the model for many:
    MAR SANTANA, NESTOR MALGAPO, RICO RIVAL, RUDY FLORESE, FLORO DERY.

    I’d say that the most copied in this decade (copied as in copied FRAME BY FRAME by the new TECHNICIANS of the komiks industry) were:

    RICO RIVAL (there was no komiks in the 1970s that Rival’s drawings were not copied. You open every issue of ALL publications, you’d see Rival’s illustrations, copied line by line).

    NESTOR MALGAPO (with Malgapo’s beautiful figures, his drawings became irresistible for copycats. Like Rival, his drawings were copied line by line because the publishers could not afford to pay RIVAL and MALGAPO. These publishers were so cheap, the best thing that they want were CLONES).

    RUDY FLORESE (with understated dynamism, his drawings were feasted on by many hacks, again, line per line).

    MAR SANTANA (with his simple lines and easy style to imitate, tons of clones came to life).

    FLORO DERY (the L’enfant terrible of the local komiks industry. Despite his “I don’t give a damn attitude towards publishers”, and doing what he pleased rather than doing what the publishers like, he made his style evolved continously, and as his style changed, the copycats who immitated him also changed to his new style. Later on, the copycats got tired copying him from more mutations, and they stuck to the old styles that he already abandoned, sort of like a reptile’s molten skin left behind to be feasted on). he-he.

    Because the 1970s komiks were the busiest in terms of popularity and brisk business), the foreign styles of Vampirella and other well-known series of that time were also copied, and in many instances, would look ridiculous, because even if your story is contemporary 1970s, here comes the drawings wearing the costumes of period pieces of JOSE ORTIZ, STEVE MAROTO, et al. I have several stories illustrated by copycats, which, to my dismay, all look like period pieces, as if these stories were set in the 1800s, with characters talking with all the slang of the 1970s.

    We can say, therefore, that the 1970s were like the opening line of Charles Dickens’ A TALE OF TWO CITIES: “the best of times, and the worst of times” in the RP komiks industry.

    Best, because money was overflowing for komiks creators, but worst, because too many hacks also joined the industry, who saw the the komiks as a GOLD RUSH, rather than an art form.

16. Leinil Yu on December 29th, 2010 1:53 am

    it takes 30 minutes to swipe what takes a legitimate artist hours to do, and years of training and studying, not to mention money spent on books and classes.

    yes, you’d know that if you are an artist or writer.

17. Jad on December 29th, 2010 2:48 am

    I don’t even know if I have a right to be in this conversation as I am not an illustrator. I am however a creator. As a musician, and seeing “plagiarism” and “swiping” on an almost normal and daily basis, I do understand that lines and definitions can get blurred and broken, especially with the evolving nature of what is considered “art” and “art techniques” in a rapidly changing and (for now) mostly unregulated trade.

    I understand @adam!, really, and I understand his insistence and you can see how he drew his conclusions.

    However, as an artist this understanding does not make me feel any better about having any of my work or any of my fellow artist’s work stolen, or seeing such blatant examples of it, as posted here.

    @Adam!, I believe it is a bit patronizing of you to call for a “more productive discussion” as if it is not already so, because you cannot resolve an artist’s natural and human indignation over plagiarism, with your intellectual analysis of how it is an inevitable result of history. We are already talking about it.

    And I completely understand and agree with Gerry:. in our heart and conscience we know that it is wrong. It is what it is. To me, anyway, and I am sorry but I cannot see myself “legitimizing” the idea of plagiarism without feeling ashamed of myself.

    Nor can I see myself swiping from someone else and still have the nerve to call myself a “creator”, no matter that somewhere a logical @adam will come and defend the sociological factors that led me to do so.

18. Ferres on December 29th, 2010 2:57 am

    Plagiarism aside, what erks me more is that the original is still clearly superior to the copy.

19. Jeff on December 29th, 2010 9:01 am

    As a developer, writing as software or application is, to us, is also an art. And I don’t deny that I do copy-paste codes from one source to my application. BUT, I do note it that I have taken source codes from another person’s code in my application. As a personal stand I do not copy paste codes/art/music/drawings/etc and state that it’s all mine, its just goes against my principles.

20. Ed on December 29th, 2010 6:03 pm

    My few of my work also been swiped, some mentioned me some didn’t.

    Here’s a link of my original:
    http://fav.me/d174nbm

    and here the link of the swiped:
    http://www.facebook.com/edtadeo/posts/155735334472336
    Didn’t even bother to mention me and claimed he did it by himself.

    Hope you guys can click the link, or even read what other posted, esp. the one drew it. :) (Posts/replies are in Tagalog)

    It somehow bothers me. I sometimes don’t even mind if I’m not mentioned if they copy my work. But claiming it’s theirs, that would hurt me.

    We should admit now what we copied or swiped the art from. We can’t get out of it now in digital age.

21. Gerry Alanguilan on December 31st, 2010 12:35 pm

    Oh yeah, I think I’ve said all I would want, and others have said other things that I agree with.

    However, to those who posted and didn’t see their comment here…. just so you know, *I’m* the only one who can use profane language on this blog. If this infuriates your twisted sense of freedom, then go fuck off and do it yourself in your own blog.