Taking an unplanned break between books, all my reading over the past two weeks has been pretty much of the comic book variety. I've been buying more lately too and soon I'm going to need another box (that would be #8) for proper storage. So I've been a casual comic book reader for most of my life and a serious one for about the past eight years and lately I've been asking myself, "Are comics getting better?" Is that why I'm buying more?
Taking a look at what I'm currently collecting, the answer certainly isn't apparent. Over eighty percent of the books I follow and have followed over the years are Marvel, featuring superhero-types in that world. Many of the graphic novels I purchase are this too but those that are Marvel usually don't contain recent material at all. The vast majority of it comes from the eighties and nineties. As far as titles like X-Men goes, this is a direct reflection of how I feel about their state. Aside from a run of forty-some issues of the New Mutants title launched in late 2003 or early 2004, that eventually was renamed simply New X-Men (not to be confused with the title written primarily by Grant Morrison starting around 2000), I've never been able to maintain an interest in any X-book of the past decade. If I want stories featuring mutants I look to Chris Claremont and John Byrne, mostly. With some early stuff by Jim Lee and Rob Liefeld.
So I definitely don't think any of the X books are getting better but there's also a lot I simply haven't bothered with so it's fair to say I'm possibly missing out on something. I've been tinkering with the idea of picking up the newest X-Force but this will probably come to nothing.
But it's clear that I believe the Avengers have gotten a lot better. Here is a team that I have had almost zero interest in before 2004. The "big three" of Cap, Iron Man and Thor never did anything for me and even today after all that's transpired, it's only Cap whom I've changed my tune about. Brian Bendis is of course the man most responsible for this, with assists from guys like Ed Brubaker and Dan Slott here and there.
I could go on and on in this vein without really getting anywhere and possibly boring the living hell out of you so let's leave Marvel behind, shall we? Hell, let's leave superheroes behind too. Because really, as much as I love that genre and always will, I completely understand that it is the genre that simultaneously dominates and embarrasses the medium. No matter how well these titles are written, they're probably never going to escape the stigma that they carry for a lot of people. Which is unfortunate but fine.
But it's really not fine that this is probably the leading reason why so many people who love books and reading don't take an interest in comics and graphic novels. Do I have a solution? No. Really, if someone wants to deprive himself of the brilliance of something like Watchmen, Sandman, Maus or The Unwritten or any alternative comics by geniuses like Chris Ware (or how about Renee French? Look these people up!) just because they make naive assumptions about comics, then that's just his loss and I feel sorry for him. Call me a snob but if you have never read any comics or manga then I don't see how you could possibly call yourself a true fan of or authority on literature. I mean, you can be one to a point of course, but by ignoring a huge section of it, you maintain a narrow view. Then again, I can't say I've read a great deal of medieval ballads - so does that make me some kind of hypocrite? Yeah...no.
Ever since their birth, comics have been fighting an uphill battle to achieve legitimacy and respect in literary circles and sadly, it still seems like there's a ways to go. Someone recently told me that they themselves didn't read comics simply because they "didn't see the appeal". That was certainly a new one to me. Usually, if anyone had something to say on the subject, they'd talk about what they found to be unappealing. But just a lack of appeal overall? I find that hard to buy. Comics, more than any other literary medium - wears its appeal on its sleeve - it's right there. You don't have to search for it. It's front and centre. The fusion of writing and art to tell a story. Any story you can think of. I've yet to meet anyone who says they don't appreciate good art. So isn't good art appealing? Is there something about combining good art and good writing that somehow lessens their value? That seems a little screwy to me. As a pretty experienced student of the school of close reading, I figured I should take a stab at explaining comics and their appeal.
As a medium that is read, comic books relinquish a degree of control to its audience that television, movies, theatre and records do not. Even the shortest passages - maybe just one panel - are limitless in the time that they can command. The images remain frozen, the words echo on the page. Only once we've absorbed the tone and meaning do we move on. That's not something we do when reading a prose novel. A comic's inclusion of visual information is probably the major reason for its ghettoization, the idea being that words are harder earned information than pictures. But the fact is that while images do replace imagination, they also invite readers to slow down and reflect in a way that pure text never will. To me, this makes the experience of reading a comic more engaging than reading a novel. Not better. They're just different. Nothing is better than comics for delivering that one-two punch of active engagement and submissive escapism.
Since a comic book requires both acute visual and narrative talents, the comic book industry, kind of like the film industry, was facilitated by a studio system, at least in its earlier days. Comics are very rarely singular in their vision and nearly always collaborative in their creation. This makes them quite different once again from the novel, novella, play or short story. Even writer-artists have inkers, letterers (an often overlooked artform in itself) and of course, editors to work with.
But back to the actual experience. Comic books aren't a passive experience like film - it still is the imaginative, self-motivated act of reading that puts events into motion and brings characters to life. The result is an experience that we perceive through the intellectual force of text and the visual force of the image. At their best, these elements combine to create an intensity of experience that text alone can't hope to match. Of course, this isn't easily accomplished. Which is what I really believe makes comics special as a medium. While most people are happy to appreciate a pretty picture or to lose themselves in a good story, for some reason the combination creates raised expectations, if not a lack of interest that I just can't fathom.
I've always described myself as a "non visual" person and it's the truth. When recalling a person, I don't see their face flash in my mind, I hear their voice. It's often how I recognize actors in movies when they're playing roles that make them appear different. I'm pretty lousy at remembering appearance but I can't be fooled by voice. I'd much rather attend a symphony than a museum. But there is something still about the visual experience of reading that I adore. It's why I've never taken to audio books. I take great delight in how words are sometimes formed and how they look on the page. I love "oo" words like "moon", "broom", crook". Because it is so rare in English, I'm always pleased to see an "x" somewhere. This visual experience is absolutely crucial for me in reading. Here's a question for you: how often, when you're reading, do you find your eye floating to the bottom of the page to take in new information, maybe not even a full sentence, then return to where you were and continue reading forward? Sometimes I have to consciously force myself to keep my eyes from drifting ahead because I don't trust them. Comics take this experience to an even more pure level as we take in the picture up, down, to the side, up diagonally and so on, merging imagery and words effortlessly. It's not something you have to try to do; you just do it.
I've reached the end of my essay and am sorry to say I haven't been able to come up with a neat, concise conclusion. While that bugs the hell out of me, at least it will keep me from just repeating myself. If I come up with something later, I'll be sure to add it. See you in the funny pages.
4 comments:
Having recognized my own words, I feel somehow duty-bound to defend my comment, although I have no real defence. I would like to explain further my lack of interest, but at this point I'm not sure I can. Watchmen is on The List, and I'm sure there are others that should be as well, and I'm sure I'll have more articulate things to say on the subject after I've actually read some.
But let me see if I can come up with something on why I haven't yet. It's not because I don't think they're worth my time; let me be clear on that.
Sometimes the visuals definitely don't help. Like with text-only writing, if the style doesn't appeal, it makes it hard to get into the book. And with that style splashed right there on the cover and/or in the pages, I'm sure I'm guilty of judging many graphic books by their covers. Literally.
I also, as a general rule, prefer books that are either stand-alones or are part of a trilogy at most. I have so bloody many things to read that I'm always hesitant to lock myself into something that is many volumes long (even if the volumes don't take long individually). And while there are certainly graphic novels that fit this criteria, there are many that don't, and that has steered me away from the genre as a whole (I've applied the same logic to most fantasy, and have only just recently been willing to even attempt much of that – and have discovered some very worthwhile stuff there, I might add, so I can be brought around.).
But I also agree with you that anyone who considers themselves any sort of a connoisseur should not cut off an entire branch. I've read many other things I had no prior interest in, so clearly it's time for a foray into this genre as well.
Damn, that was long. Probably should have written my own post instead of shanghai-ing your comment thread. Sorry.
Not at all. and it's fine - you don't have to defend anything, really. i'm sorry if my tone was snippy and/or self-righteous; wasn't my intention but that's just how i write.
one thing i'll concede is that, medium aside, something i just love about Marvel is the exact thing that you say you avoid (and i perfectly understand your reasons there) - i LOVE the interconnectivity of the world and while continuity is an extremely tricky thing in comics, i'm a slave to it. and yes, it's exactly why i like a lot of fantasy novels too - my favourite fictional world after the Marvel U is probably Forgotten Realms. while it's mostly broken into separate series they are all set in the same world and build on a common history.
So anyway, i hope you understand that i didn't write the essay as some sort of indignant challenge to you or anything you said. In fact, i'm very glad you gave me some stuff to think about.
No worries. I wasn't feeling attacked or anything. And "defend" was perhaps not the best choice of words, as it implies that attack feeling. You just seemed baffled, so I wanted to help you out by attempting to explain it. Don't know if it helped or not.
I also find it amusing that mere hours after writing this, I stumbled across a graphic novel edition of The Last Unicorn while at work, and found myself somewhat drawn to it. Go figure...
Post a Comment