3 out of 5

Normally I’d like to read a whole series or completed arc before weighing in on a comic, but the totality of Chuck Austen’s Strips – a “semi-autobiographical” comic about being a (horny) college kid – is tough to track down after its nine-issue Rip Off Press run, after which Chuck self-published a following three issues and two specials (reprints of earlier Strips + extra material) through an imprint called ‘White Buffalo,’ and which are not digitally available as far as I’ve found, and pretty cost-prohibitive to buy. SO, though I hope to get my hands on those final issues some day, I do think there’s enough here to get a sense of Strips for a review, though I bet the interesting trajectory the last few RO start to take continued into those issues – meaning it might’ve bumped the review – and who knows what could’ve happened had this run to the 30+ issues intended.

As further preamble: I found Chuck Austen at the right time. I was just getting back in to comics as a young adult around the time Chuck was on his X-Men run, which most would probably consider ‘infamous.’ But I’d never been a huge X-Men fan as a kid, and I don’t harp too much on continuity as long as the vibes are right, so… I dunno, I thought it was pretty cool stuff. It tapped in to what I expected of comics – the soap opera – but elevated it with some weird ideas and an odd “adultness” that countered its overly simplistic aspects. Austen became one of the first writers I followed, and I was gobbling up and enjoying his Action Comics and etcetera before I became aware of a backlash against him.

There’s more to that preamble, but it should be saved for the reviews of the related, relevant books. Let it suffice to say that I’ve always had a soft spot for the writer, and with his reemergence back into comics in the 2020s, it sparked an Austen reread, alongside a desire to fill out the parts of his writerly catalogue I’d previously left aside – his early adults only stuff. Like Strips.

Contained within Strips – though honestly, moreso in its letters pages – is everything you need to know to “understand” Austen. The actual content of these issues is okay; it embraces Chuck’s overall philosophies with youthful gusto, and ultimately starts to demonstrate – eight or nine issues in – the learning curve of appreciating Chuck. But it’s also intended as erotica (even if some of that is kind of / potentially “meta,” giving us erotica in a form we expect), and it’s drawn with a loose, embellished style that’s part teenager’s notebook, part Archie, and occasionally kind of clunky, with a sex-positive world view that’s the kind of eyerolly stuff you’d hear from any “feminist” straight male in college. (Again, some of that is intentional; though some of it is sincere; and we should note this was thirty five years ago as of this writing, and lord knows I had some pretty eye-rolly ideas thirty five years ago.)

But back to the letters: Chuck starts printing these early on, and drops some lore on us: that Strips is semi-autobiographical; that there is no AIDS in the Strips world; and that it represents how he / those around him saw the world back in those days – i.e. this is “real,” but from a certain point of view. Additionally, he fields some letters that are mixtures of praise and criticism, and boy does he respond to these harshly. Then, when he gets some further backlash about how he responded, he pledges to print the letters (and his responses) in full, stating that he assumed his readers would understand the subtext of the letters and the intentions of his replies in the initial abbreviated forms, kind of frustrated and dumbfounded that he has to stoop to the level of spelling it out – printing the full letters / replies – for his audience.

To be fair, Chuck is consistent: if you’re going to criticize, frame it as your opinion and not that something is “right” or “wrong,” and don’t provide advice on a creator-owned story, especially an autobiographical one – it’s not your story. Furthermore, if you are going to criticize, stick to the material and avoid saying things about the creator of the material, even if indirectly. Both in abbreviated and longform, I feel these points are clear, though arguably made well or not; Chuck can be forest-for-the-trees sometimes and hyperfocus on one line of a letter, both positively and negatively. He also (amusingly) prints some praise from Dave Sim, and man-o-man was that guy’s path toward his particular worldviews pretty obvious. But again – forest-for-the-trees – I’d believe Chuck saw the positives in the letter, and chose not to focus on the more sexist aspects, or interpreted them in ways that aligned with his own version of feminism.

Which is complicated, and not. Bluntly: communication is key, and sex is a natural form of communication. The bodies are on display in Strips – just one male body, really, but we see his well-endowedness often (and he’s told he’s well-endowed; and also he’s Chuck’s proxy, hm) – and though it’s pretty silly, with chicks hanging out in the nude and going 0% on the Bechdel test, there is also a naivety to it, or rather an honestness, that comes across as more of a depiction of being young and horny versus outright aiming for the book to be boob-ogling jerk off material. The complicated part is that Chuck also recognizes that communication is difficult, and sometimes confusing; the teen sex fantasy of the first few sex-rompy issues starts to become something more complicated towards the end of the run, as emotions get mixed up with the free sex, and insecurities start to poke through in various ways from the various characters.

But you do have to stand back to appreciate this, and that’s why the letters are the more concise representation of Austen’s approach: he assumes you get what he’s going for, and allows himself the “indulgence” of stuffing the first several issues with cheesecake as it serves the overall concept; he assumed his readers would glean the same thing from the letters and his replies he was, and so was confident in initially supplying an abbreviated view.

And, of course… this still was cheesecake. That was the point. Even though Chuck could use that as a vehicle to explore some deeper thoughts – in the same way some 80s sex comedies might actually have some good ideas between their sexual-harassment-is-fun celebrations – Strips, at least in these first nine issues, was still cheesecake, and gave us plenty of firm boobs, buns, and big ol’ cocks to prove it. Issues 10-12 may positively add to that narrative, as would’ve / could’ve the remaining tens of issues Austen had apparently planned, but nonetheless, I’m not here trying to tell you that naked teens pondering who’s sleeping with whom is high art. But Strips is a key – and worthwhile – part of Austen’s catalog.