Continuing with Monday's discussion of romance in graphic novels, I would like to examine the implications of the kiss between Jin and Suzy in American Born Chinese (188.1). The kiss comes about after Suzy shares her tale of rejection by a former friend that occurred over the weekend, and how events like these lead her to believe the degrading comments directed toward her by their classmates. Similarly, Jin believes that he is not good enough for Amelia because one of their peers tells him so. It is arguably the most tender moment in the book; Suzy has shared her deepest insecurities with the one person she knows will understand, and Jin is able to relate more than ever at this moment. However, this does not explain why he kisses her. It was not exactly something that has been building up for a long time. He had never expressed any interest in her; in fact, at the beginning of the novel he bemoans the fact that they were always associated with each other due to their Asian backgrounds. In addition, Suzy is his best friend's girlfriend. Jin must know how much this would hurt Wei-Chen. However, what he says in defense of his betrayal is even more hurtful. Wei-Chen tries to be reasonable with Jin, but Jin's response is nothing short of mean and cruel. The worst part is that he eventually believes the things he said to his friend, that Wei-Chen was not good enough for Suzy and that she deserved better. This is what ultimately leads to his transformation into Danny. By betraying his best friend, he has finally forfeited his soul.
I am still at somewhat of a loss as to why Jin kissed Suzy. One could chalk it up to hormones, but I do not believe this to be the case. This seems to be his moment of transformation, even more than when he is physically transformed into Danny. It is after this kiss that he is so mean to Wei-Chen. Perhaps he was trying to get revenge on the people who have been so mean and hurtful to him by hurting those whom he believed were not capable of hurting him back. Adolescence is a strange thing, and the obstacles that Jin, Suzy, and Wei-Chen had to face because of their Asian-American status only added to the already numerous complications.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Clap clap clap clap clap
As another student fairly new to comics and graphic novels, I'm eager to address another stylistic element of the media. While each section of ABC is distinguished and introduced with a pictoral stamp, Chin-Kee is further introduced on page 43 in a television-like frame. The allusion to television continues whenever Chin-Kee is present, as many frames are bordered with audience cues to clap or laugh.
I know we touched on this idea in class briefly, how text reads as part of the image, but I often find the clapping and laughing in Chin-Kee's frames excessive. One could argue that the repetition strengthens the satire, or that Yang references television to further attack the John Hughes depiction of Asian Americans. I am unconvinced, however, that all cues are properly attached to scenes. I would like to know, particularly from those fluent in stylistic elements of comics, if this is a valid gripe or if I'm overextending my analysis as a reader. Should I really care where these clap clap claps and these ha ha has occur? Should I rather treat the cues as a unit and find an overall meaning instead of weighing them with (or against) each scene?
I find one particular misplacement of these cues to occur on page 198, the scene where Jin is fully realized as Danny. Visually, I suppose, the border of claps is engaging; I look at the repetition and think that more is better than less, that Yang is telling me to look here and see something I don't already know. The problem I have with this scene, however, is that the claps don't do enough to be indispensable. That is, I could interpret the scene without them. When is text as image overbearing? When does more become too much? Does anyone feel like their head is being beat with a pounding, pounding repetitive force that is pounding so loudly they almost forgot their heart was pounding too? I'll rephrase once more: when does art become distraction?
I know we touched on this idea in class briefly, how text reads as part of the image, but I often find the clapping and laughing in Chin-Kee's frames excessive. One could argue that the repetition strengthens the satire, or that Yang references television to further attack the John Hughes depiction of Asian Americans. I am unconvinced, however, that all cues are properly attached to scenes. I would like to know, particularly from those fluent in stylistic elements of comics, if this is a valid gripe or if I'm overextending my analysis as a reader. Should I really care where these clap clap claps and these ha ha has occur? Should I rather treat the cues as a unit and find an overall meaning instead of weighing them with (or against) each scene?
I find one particular misplacement of these cues to occur on page 198, the scene where Jin is fully realized as Danny. Visually, I suppose, the border of claps is engaging; I look at the repetition and think that more is better than less, that Yang is telling me to look here and see something I don't already know. The problem I have with this scene, however, is that the claps don't do enough to be indispensable. That is, I could interpret the scene without them. When is text as image overbearing? When does more become too much? Does anyone feel like their head is being beat with a pounding, pounding repetitive force that is pounding so loudly they almost forgot their heart was pounding too? I'll rephrase once more: when does art become distraction?
Gene Yang in DC on September 29
For info on Gene Luen Yang's appearance at the National Book Festival between 7th & 14th Streets on September 29, click here!
Monkey King Mania
I thought the tale of the Monkey King was one of the more fascinating pieces of "American Born Chinese," and the weaving of this into the narrative added a vital mythological element to the novel.
Personally, having lived in Asia (Thailand specifically) for many years, I was familiar with Hanuman, the Monkey God of the Ramakien epic, but after some research, I found that Sun Wu-Kung, or the Monkey King, was another legend from the Chinese epic novel, Journey to the West.
It seems that Gene Yang either heard a particular version of the tale or adapted the pieces of the story which he remembered, adding or augmenting as he saw fit. I'd be interested in finding out whether the tale that he portrayed was a faithful representation of what he had heard, or if he tweaked the legend to fit his novel. Among the details that I found in my research were that the Monkey King first becomes angry after he was given the job of "stable keeper" by the Jade Emperor and that he is named the "greatest sage" before he gets into trouble, is challenged to outrun the hand, and gets thrown under the mountain by the Buddha.
I found a site which includes a 100-panel novelization of the Monkey King here - http://www.china-on-site.com/pages/comic/1.php . It seemed to be the most comprehensive, and most befitting the "graphic novel" nature of our course.
Personally, having lived in Asia (Thailand specifically) for many years, I was familiar with Hanuman, the Monkey God of the Ramakien epic, but after some research, I found that Sun Wu-Kung, or the Monkey King, was another legend from the Chinese epic novel, Journey to the West.
It seems that Gene Yang either heard a particular version of the tale or adapted the pieces of the story which he remembered, adding or augmenting as he saw fit. I'd be interested in finding out whether the tale that he portrayed was a faithful representation of what he had heard, or if he tweaked the legend to fit his novel. Among the details that I found in my research were that the Monkey King first becomes angry after he was given the job of "stable keeper" by the Jade Emperor and that he is named the "greatest sage" before he gets into trouble, is challenged to outrun the hand, and gets thrown under the mountain by the Buddha.
I found a site which includes a 100-panel novelization of the Monkey King here - http://www.china-on-site.com/pages/comic/1.php . It seemed to be the most comprehensive, and most befitting the "graphic novel" nature of our course.
Bam!
As a newcomer to reading comics and graphic novels, but an avid reader of traditional novels, I couldn't help but use American Born Chinese as an opportunity to compare the two types of literary media. Particularly in American Born Chinese, I noticed that the graphic novel medium seemed well suited to a story based so much in physicality.
Many of the qualities that are emphasized and transformations that are underwent within the novel are physical: the monkey king, disdaining his monkey smell and bare feet, becomes tall and more humanoid. Jin, under pressure to conform, first perms his hair, then changes physical form to become the blond Danny. When the true identity of Chin-Kee is revealed, he is literally beheaded and transformed.
Clearly, all of these transformations could be conveyed via narrative in the more traditional novel format, but I think some of their immediacy would be lost. It's said that a picture is worth a thousand words, but the information that a picture conveys is assimilated by the mind in a much different way than the information conveyed by a string of words. Words come one at a time, producing a cumulative store of knowledge. Pictures, on the other hand, force the viewer to assimilate multiple different pieces of information simultaneously. Thus, in pictures, these physical transformations are lent more of an effect of occurring in "real" time, than if they had been described by words.
This style works really well for conveying the "bam" of these physical transformations. I find this really exciting-- in some ways it makes me think a lot about the multi-level assimilation of infomration demanded by more avant-guarde styles of poetry that create intense and simaltaeneous impressions on the intellectual and the sonic or visual planes. It also leads me to wonder about the differing perceptual styles of people who prefer graphic novels versus those of people who are more drawn to eclusivley text-based works of literature. I'm excited about continuing to think about the perceptual experience of this type of literature!
Many of the qualities that are emphasized and transformations that are underwent within the novel are physical: the monkey king, disdaining his monkey smell and bare feet, becomes tall and more humanoid. Jin, under pressure to conform, first perms his hair, then changes physical form to become the blond Danny. When the true identity of Chin-Kee is revealed, he is literally beheaded and transformed.
Clearly, all of these transformations could be conveyed via narrative in the more traditional novel format, but I think some of their immediacy would be lost. It's said that a picture is worth a thousand words, but the information that a picture conveys is assimilated by the mind in a much different way than the information conveyed by a string of words. Words come one at a time, producing a cumulative store of knowledge. Pictures, on the other hand, force the viewer to assimilate multiple different pieces of information simultaneously. Thus, in pictures, these physical transformations are lent more of an effect of occurring in "real" time, than if they had been described by words.
This style works really well for conveying the "bam" of these physical transformations. I find this really exciting-- in some ways it makes me think a lot about the multi-level assimilation of infomration demanded by more avant-guarde styles of poetry that create intense and simaltaeneous impressions on the intellectual and the sonic or visual planes. It also leads me to wonder about the differing perceptual styles of people who prefer graphic novels versus those of people who are more drawn to eclusivley text-based works of literature. I'm excited about continuing to think about the perceptual experience of this type of literature!
Tea For Two
Maybe I just love the Robo Happy shirt and the pants hiked up to his chest, but there must be other reasons I find Wei Chen to be the most interesting character in American Born Chinese. Sadly, he gets the short shrift at the novel's end, giving the conclusion a perfunctory feel.
For the sake of simplicity I would like to focus on Wei Chen's role within to specific contexts (that's not to say others do not exist): 1. Judeo-Christian mythology; and 2. The experiences of the children of 1st generation immigrants. In the allegorical/literal world that Gene Yang has created in American Born Chinese, these categories are not mutually exclusive, but rather work together to deal with the complexities of assimilation. In order to address the connection in its most basic form, it is probably best to consider the idea of "Rebellion against the father."
Though it surely has precedent in traditions that pre-date Christianity, perhaps the most enduring example of filial disobedience that we can reference is Lucifer's rebellion against heaven as recounted by John Milton in his epic poem Paradise Lost. Wei Chen refusing his heavenly duties as emissary of of Tze-Yo-Tzuh and servant to mankind (218-220) certainly has Luciferian undertones. (See also the angels Bartleby and Loki in Kevin Smith's Dogma for another recent take on the tradition).
If we take Wei Chen out of the celestial realm and consider his rebellion against the father in literal terms, we get a pretty compelling example of the type of trajectory that the lives of children of Asian immigrants can take. Jin's rebellion on the other hand is more passive if not more complete. He adopts hairstyles, speech patterns, and love interests consistent with those of his caucasian peers. Wei Chen, however, rages against a system of cultural values rather than appearances. Before falling from the heavens, he tells his father that he will use the mortal world for his own pleasure (220.1) and when we see him next it looks as if he has fulfilled that oath (228-229). I only wish that when he and Jin had a chance to talk again, they could have taught one another more than the best place to find good milk tea.
For the sake of simplicity I would like to focus on Wei Chen's role within to specific contexts (that's not to say others do not exist): 1. Judeo-Christian mythology; and 2. The experiences of the children of 1st generation immigrants. In the allegorical/literal world that Gene Yang has created in American Born Chinese, these categories are not mutually exclusive, but rather work together to deal with the complexities of assimilation. In order to address the connection in its most basic form, it is probably best to consider the idea of "Rebellion against the father."
Though it surely has precedent in traditions that pre-date Christianity, perhaps the most enduring example of filial disobedience that we can reference is Lucifer's rebellion against heaven as recounted by John Milton in his epic poem Paradise Lost. Wei Chen refusing his heavenly duties as emissary of of Tze-Yo-Tzuh and servant to mankind (218-220) certainly has Luciferian undertones. (See also the angels Bartleby and Loki in Kevin Smith's Dogma for another recent take on the tradition).
If we take Wei Chen out of the celestial realm and consider his rebellion against the father in literal terms, we get a pretty compelling example of the type of trajectory that the lives of children of Asian immigrants can take. Jin's rebellion on the other hand is more passive if not more complete. He adopts hairstyles, speech patterns, and love interests consistent with those of his caucasian peers. Wei Chen, however, rages against a system of cultural values rather than appearances. Before falling from the heavens, he tells his father that he will use the mortal world for his own pleasure (220.1) and when we see him next it looks as if he has fulfilled that oath (228-229). I only wish that when he and Jin had a chance to talk again, they could have taught one another more than the best place to find good milk tea.
Nitpicking
Something more substantial to follow, but for the moment, I just have three tiny problems with the American Born Chinese. I'm sure most people were able to get past these little glitches; they in no way affect the arcs of the individual storylines, but seeing issues that should have been resolved during the editorial process make their way into the published version, shaded my reception of the text as a whole.
Maybe I'm being too harsh a critic. Maybe I'm just nitpicking. Or I could be completely wrong. Please let me know.
1. On 59.4 The Monkey King is told to report to Ao-Jun, Dragon King of the Western Sea for execution. When we get to 61.3, however, the Monkey King has arrived in the kingdom of Ao-Kuang, Dragon King of the Eastern Sea. That's fine. Maybe he just decided to make a pit stop there first; but on 62.1, Ao-Kang takes credit for sending the invitation and initiates the execution.
2. As indicated by the captions in many of its panels, Jin Yang's storyline is told in the first person. This perspective is sustained by Jin's presence in all of the panels EXCEPT for 99-102 when Amelia and Wei Chen are alone together.
3. I thought a weak case for irony was made on 25.1-2, when Jin recounts how his parents arrived at the same airport within a week of each other then met in the library at SF State a year and a half later. Maybe had they been on the same flight or from the same village in China . . .
OK maybe I really am splitting hairs here. I thought Yang was succesful on many levels (more on that in my next post), but these surface blemishes kept me itching even while enjoying his deft handling of deeper issues.
Maybe I'm being too harsh a critic. Maybe I'm just nitpicking. Or I could be completely wrong. Please let me know.
1. On 59.4 The Monkey King is told to report to Ao-Jun, Dragon King of the Western Sea for execution. When we get to 61.3, however, the Monkey King has arrived in the kingdom of Ao-Kuang, Dragon King of the Eastern Sea. That's fine. Maybe he just decided to make a pit stop there first; but on 62.1, Ao-Kang takes credit for sending the invitation and initiates the execution.
2. As indicated by the captions in many of its panels, Jin Yang's storyline is told in the first person. This perspective is sustained by Jin's presence in all of the panels EXCEPT for 99-102 when Amelia and Wei Chen are alone together.
3. I thought a weak case for irony was made on 25.1-2, when Jin recounts how his parents arrived at the same airport within a week of each other then met in the library at SF State a year and a half later. Maybe had they been on the same flight or from the same village in China . . .
OK maybe I really am splitting hairs here. I thought Yang was succesful on many levels (more on that in my next post), but these surface blemishes kept me itching even while enjoying his deft handling of deeper issues.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Three More Cartoonists from Our Syllabus Come to Town
Breaking news from the PEN/Faulkner Foundation:
On November 9 at the DCJCC, the PEN/Faulkner Foundation will sponsor a discussion, moderated by Dan Raeburn, with Lynda Barry, Alison Bechdel, and Chris Ware. All four are authors represented on our syllabus, and we will have recently finished reading graphic novels by Barry and Bechdel and will be just about to start Ware's Jimmy Corrigan, the Smartest Kid on Earth. I've added a link about this event to the "Comics In DC (Events & Organizations" list on the right side of the blog, but you can also click here to go directly from this post. (As of right now, the page only lists Barry & Ware, but I have been informed that Bechdel has recently confirmed for this event as well.)
I'm waiting to hear if a student discount will be available to us. Even if not, the tickets for this event shouldn't be too expensive. Still, cross your fingers for savings!
On November 9 at the DCJCC, the PEN/Faulkner Foundation will sponsor a discussion, moderated by Dan Raeburn, with Lynda Barry, Alison Bechdel, and Chris Ware. All four are authors represented on our syllabus, and we will have recently finished reading graphic novels by Barry and Bechdel and will be just about to start Ware's Jimmy Corrigan, the Smartest Kid on Earth. I've added a link about this event to the "Comics In DC (Events & Organizations" list on the right side of the blog, but you can also click here to go directly from this post. (As of right now, the page only lists Barry & Ware, but I have been informed that Bechdel has recently confirmed for this event as well.)
I'm waiting to hear if a student discount will be available to us. Even if not, the tickets for this event shouldn't be too expensive. Still, cross your fingers for savings!
American Born Chinese?
I was just wondering how everyone (who has finished the book already) felt about the ending, and the way the three stories were connected? I liked the fact that Yang did try to connect them, and create that sense of interconnectivity to add depth to the story, and give all three storylines relevance, but I'm still on the fence as to how I feel about execution. It sort of feels like it was a little rushed to me - like there should have maybe been at least one more chapter to each storyline. Any thoughts?
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
On a slightly Unrelated topic.
I would like to say to the class that if you are looking for Eight-ball 23 and 22 (the ice harvest) in issue format, Big Planet Comics in Bethesda still has single issues still in stock that are much cheaper than bookstore prices. however, he has limited quantities of the stock and they may run out. So act quickly!
What makes for a good post?
Ideally, an entry posted to this blog should both record an interesting thought on the part of its author and strive to provoke further thought on the part of its readers. An entry should be clear and concise, and when appropriate it should make use of the Web-based resources available to blogs (for example, links to specific other pages under discussion or to sites hosting texts or forums of interest, and images that illustrate relevant points of interest).
Posts can vary in length. A short paragraph can suffice, provided it offers a complete idea or raises an interesting problem in a fully intelligible way. But a post may also constitute a brief essay in itself, if you are moved to pursue the thread of a particularly interesting topic. Given the screen-based interface, however, you should avoid posting lengthy entries that would require scrolling down for more than two or three screens at most. If you want to sustain an argument that's longer than that, you should really break it down into a series of separate posts. That will both ease readability and help to ensure that comments are focused on discrete points of interest.
As for the topics of your posts, all I ask is that they relate to the subject of our course. How they relate is up to you! You may choose to write a response to a current text under discussion, or you may prefer to continue an argument about a broader theoretical approach. You may also use this space to solicit feedback on your own research interests, or to explore other aspects of our topic that couldn't fit it into our syllabus. Reviews of other texts (including articles and books of criticism) are also appropriate, but make sure to avoid mere plot summary or paraphrase—give your readers a sense of the work's value and tackle its claims.
The main purpose of these blog entries is to facilitate the exchange of ideas and information among participants in our class. The exchange can be as lively and as wide-ranging as you want it to be, as focused and as deeply-considered as you can make it. I expect that we'll all learn what posts work best by simply continuing to post, read, and comment regularly. I look forward to following the progress of our blog!
Posts can vary in length. A short paragraph can suffice, provided it offers a complete idea or raises an interesting problem in a fully intelligible way. But a post may also constitute a brief essay in itself, if you are moved to pursue the thread of a particularly interesting topic. Given the screen-based interface, however, you should avoid posting lengthy entries that would require scrolling down for more than two or three screens at most. If you want to sustain an argument that's longer than that, you should really break it down into a series of separate posts. That will both ease readability and help to ensure that comments are focused on discrete points of interest.
As for the topics of your posts, all I ask is that they relate to the subject of our course. How they relate is up to you! You may choose to write a response to a current text under discussion, or you may prefer to continue an argument about a broader theoretical approach. You may also use this space to solicit feedback on your own research interests, or to explore other aspects of our topic that couldn't fit it into our syllabus. Reviews of other texts (including articles and books of criticism) are also appropriate, but make sure to avoid mere plot summary or paraphrase—give your readers a sense of the work's value and tackle its claims.
The main purpose of these blog entries is to facilitate the exchange of ideas and information among participants in our class. The exchange can be as lively and as wide-ranging as you want it to be, as focused and as deeply-considered as you can make it. I expect that we'll all learn what posts work best by simply continuing to post, read, and comment regularly. I look forward to following the progress of our blog!
Monday, August 27, 2007
References for today's sample panels
Perhaps you are wondering what the sources are for the various panels exhibited in class today (and reprinted in your photocopy packets). They are as follows:
1) The superheroes kissing as a nuclear device explodes are from Watchmen by Alan Moore (writer) and Dave Gibbons (artist), published by DC Comics.
2) Babs Bradley being assaulted in a car comes from Buddy Does Seattle by Peter Bagge, the first of a two-volume set reprinting the comic book series Hate from Fantagraphics Books (the second volume is called Buddy Does Jersey). Bagge will be coming to town shortly; I'll try to find out the details and share them with you.
3) The Harlequin Romance-esque scene between the blonde beauty and her pointy-nosed French lover comes from Gemma Bovery by Posy Simmonds, published by Pantheon. We'll be reading this one towards the end of term.
4) The president of Blackland and his lover are pictured from Birth of a Nation, written by Aaron McGruder (Boondocks) and Reginald Hudlin and drawn by Kyle Baker (who will be a guest at ICAF this October at the Library of Congress), published by Three Rivers Press.
5) Enid Coleslaw practically loves Josh in Ghost World by Daniel Clowes (an anagram of "Enid Coleslaw"), published by Fantagraphics. The film version directed by Terry Zwigoff is worth viewing, though quite different in plot from the graphic novel.
6) Quinn is surprised by a kiss from Peter Stillman's wife in this scene from the graphic novel version of Paul Auster's City of Glass, adapted by Paul Karasik and illustrated by David Mazzucchelli; published by Picador. This one's on the syllabus.
7) A tender kiss between two lovers in Howard Cruse's Stuck Rubber Baby, published by Paradox Press, an imprint of DC Comics.
8) A couple of panels from Lynda Barry's One Hundred Demons, published by Sasquatch Books; we'll be reading this one, too.
9) An ecstatic kiss in Craig Thompson's autobiographical Blankets, published by Top Shelf.
10) Berkeley-based Ariel Schrag (now a writer for The L Word) kisses her girlfriend in area bathrooms in these panels from Potential, published by Slave Labor.
11) James Kochalka, as a bucktoothed elf, doesn't exactly relish his buddy Cooley's offer to make out, even though Cooley is portrayed as a cute dog; from a backup feature in Dylan Horrocks's Atlas #1, published by Drawn & Quarterly.
All of these comics are entertaining, interesting, and well worth reading.
1) The superheroes kissing as a nuclear device explodes are from Watchmen by Alan Moore (writer) and Dave Gibbons (artist), published by DC Comics.
2) Babs Bradley being assaulted in a car comes from Buddy Does Seattle by Peter Bagge, the first of a two-volume set reprinting the comic book series Hate from Fantagraphics Books (the second volume is called Buddy Does Jersey). Bagge will be coming to town shortly; I'll try to find out the details and share them with you.
3) The Harlequin Romance-esque scene between the blonde beauty and her pointy-nosed French lover comes from Gemma Bovery by Posy Simmonds, published by Pantheon. We'll be reading this one towards the end of term.
4) The president of Blackland and his lover are pictured from Birth of a Nation, written by Aaron McGruder (Boondocks) and Reginald Hudlin and drawn by Kyle Baker (who will be a guest at ICAF this October at the Library of Congress), published by Three Rivers Press.
5) Enid Coleslaw practically loves Josh in Ghost World by Daniel Clowes (an anagram of "Enid Coleslaw"), published by Fantagraphics. The film version directed by Terry Zwigoff is worth viewing, though quite different in plot from the graphic novel.
6) Quinn is surprised by a kiss from Peter Stillman's wife in this scene from the graphic novel version of Paul Auster's City of Glass, adapted by Paul Karasik and illustrated by David Mazzucchelli; published by Picador. This one's on the syllabus.
7) A tender kiss between two lovers in Howard Cruse's Stuck Rubber Baby, published by Paradox Press, an imprint of DC Comics.
8) A couple of panels from Lynda Barry's One Hundred Demons, published by Sasquatch Books; we'll be reading this one, too.
9) An ecstatic kiss in Craig Thompson's autobiographical Blankets, published by Top Shelf.
10) Berkeley-based Ariel Schrag (now a writer for The L Word) kisses her girlfriend in area bathrooms in these panels from Potential, published by Slave Labor.
11) James Kochalka, as a bucktoothed elf, doesn't exactly relish his buddy Cooley's offer to make out, even though Cooley is portrayed as a cute dog; from a backup feature in Dylan Horrocks's Atlas #1, published by Drawn & Quarterly.
All of these comics are entertaining, interesting, and well worth reading.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
...If This Be To Increase the Sum Total of Human Wisdom!
Welcome to the blog for the American University course LIT 308/608, Studies in Genre: The Graphic Novel. Our course title is problematic in various ways, and I invite you to reflect on both its shortcomings and its accuracies. To help focus our thinking about the potential meaning behind the ungainly term "graphic novel," I encourage you to follow this link to a copy of Eddie Campbell's Graphic Novel Manifesto, a not-altogether-serious document that is also not altogether kidding. One point in particular deserves special notice:
6. The goal of the graphic novelist is to take the form of the comic book, which has become an embarrassment, and raise it to a more ambitious and meaningful level. This normally involves expanding its size, but we should avoid getting into arguments about permissible size. If an artist offers a set of short stories as his new graphic novel, (as Eisner did with A Contract with God) we should not descend to quibbling. We should only ask whether his new graphic novel is a good or bad set of short stories. If he or she uses characters that appear in another place, such as Jimmy Corrigan's various appearances outside of the core book, or Gilbert Hernandez' etc. or even characters that we do not want to allow into our "secret society," we shall not dismiss them on this account. If his book no longer looks anything like comic books we should not quibble as to that either. We should only ask whether it increases the sum total of human wisdom.Let's try to keep that last question in mind as we interrogate our various graphic novels this semester, starting with Gene Yang's American Born Chinese. (And it couldn't hurt to read some comments from Yang himself on his publisher's website; click here to do so, and scroll down to see Yang's comments on the origins of his story and some additional cartooning featuring the Monkey King. You should click here also, for Yang's discussion of the use of stereotypes in his work.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)