There's a difference between critics and reviewers, although the two overlap quite a bit, especially when it comes to comics commentary. But when trying to discern the difference between the two, one rule of thumb is how visually adept the writer is in discussing the comics work under discussion as a whole.

Often many paragraphs will be spent rhapsodically recounting the writer's brilliant wordplay and plotting acuity, recounting the intricacies of the plotting and celebrating the wit and energy that shine through in the dialogue. Finally, and almost certainly often as an afterthought, the review will throw a bone to the artist, often with trite, cliched observations that tell the reader little more than that the reviewer doesn't have even a beginning grasp on the visual language of comics.

I'm sure I've been guilty of such hackneyed, facile dismissals myself on many occasions, and I regret each and every one. Being a comics artist is perhaps one of the most solitary and difficult careers one can imagine, and the rewards are hardly commensurate with the level of commitment one must possess to have even the most rudimentary of successes in the field. The very least we as critics owe them is a relevant and intelligent discussion of their effort.

"Comics are just words and pictures. You can do anything with words and pictures," American Splendor writer Harvey Pekar once noted; in the very best comics, those words and pictures are holistically united to give the reader a complete experience of the work that at least momentarily makes them forget that they're looking at words and pictures; instead, they've transcended the elements of comics and are immersed in what seems like a genuine life experience filled with drama, passion, laughter, sadness, sensuality, or whatever it is that the creator or creators wants them to feel.

The very best cartoonists -- those who do it all, write, draw, letter and maybe colour the work -- are the ones best able to integrate such holistic principles into their comics work. Think R. Crumb, James Kochalka, or Chester Brown. On the surface their work couldn't appear to be more different, but there is an underlying unity of purpose and effect to their comics. They have an instinctive understanding of the interrelationship between the words and the art and use all their creative power and understanding of craft to make the two work seamlessly together to create a complete and complex interaction that approximates genuine life experience with all the emotion and power that suggests. I submit to you that, whether working alone or in partnership with other creators, all cartoonists should aspire to such depth and wholeness in their work. And further, I submit that as readers, such standards are what we all should demand in our reading material.