Tintin Forums

I guess that my beef with both these books is Michael Farr's dry, convoluted writing style. The book by Harry Thompson was much better written, and lots more entertaining and revealing. M. Farr writes like he was writing a dreary textbook and kills all the humour of the Tintin books. Also he seems afraid to go against the Fondation Herge party line, and seriously underrates the importance of the English translations. But that's just my opinion! I must confess that I think most of the books written about Tintin since Herge's demise are hard going, full of pseudo-intellectual theorising. I couldn't get through that big "Tintin And Herge Reporters" book, it was so impossible to comprehend, though the pictures were great.

To be honest I have to agree with Zloty, I don't think the companion was that great and it wasn't really that interesting. If we'd had the level of info he got to see at the archives, I'm sure most members could have come up with something much better

Rik

Nope, I don’t agree - I think the “At Sea” book is both interesting and easy to read, and a good link between the exhibition’s subject and the books. I’d recommend it as an addition to any collection, and would also remind you that it isn’t likely to remain available for ever, so if you don’t want to be paying over the odds on eBay five years from now, get yourself a copy.

I’m not certain of what point you are making Zloty about Michael Farr being “afraid” to go against the Fondation - did it occur to you that he might just agree with their point of view? Fear may not have entered into it. I’m not pursuing that any further, as it is getting even further off topic.

To get back on the topic of "Tintin Events", then, am I the only one that thought the exhibition was a bit of a letdown?

Not a patch on the 60 Years Of Tintin show in 1989, in my opinion. A bit lacking in content, reflected in the accompanying souvenir book, which devotes a whole section to the names of ships that did not appear in the Tintin books! How pointless, and dull.

In response to Jock123's comment: writers who court controversy with regard to the official line regarding Herge and Tintin end up putting out books with no pictures inside...as was the case with Harry Thompson's book. All the officially commissioned books now seem to begin from a position whereby Herge's work is flawless and cannot be in any way critically examined. But I fear I stray from the topic once more, so I'll put a sock in it!

--
Moderator note: a new thread has been created for discussions on the "Tintin at Sea" book - see "Tintin at Sea book - general discussions".

Back on topic I spent a good 90 minutes perusing the exhibit and reading everything. I've never seen anything in a museum about Tintin so I was well impressed.

Rik

It had a different purpose to the “60 Years” one, really. That was an exhibition about Tintin; this one was an exhibition about the sea, and Tintin was the catalyst for it.

It was far more in the vein of the “World of Tintin” exhibition at the Science Museum, and far better executed and mounted, in my opinion.

This is a growing, and admirable, trend as far as I am concerned, and follows on from the “Tintin and the Incas” and “To Tibet with Tintin” exhibitions: provide a frame-work, show an attractive range of original artifacts, and use that as a stepping-off point for some other theme, which would have interested Hergé.

They can exist quite happily with purely Tintin exhibitions - e.g. “Blue Lotus” art has been exhibited round the continent on its own - and Tintin exhibitions with little or no Hergé content at all - “Tintin in the City” sported a possibly authentic studio desk, the post-cards/ pictures used (or copies?) for the Geneva hotel, some fantastic (but new) models of frames from Tintin books, and no artwork at all, and it still was a cracking exhibition, and a really interesting book!

Different strokes for different folks!