Understanding comics essay
I perceive my conscious self as shooting the rapids of infinitely variable experience. To refute each point he makes would require a very lengthy and tedious critique. In fact, many of the political and historical examples in Kunzle, who focuses on early 18th and late 18th century British broadsheets, seem highly complex to the modern reader, in terms of the issues they tackle, such as human vice and political corruption.
Here, McCloud looks to explain many of the finer details of what to consider in the process of creating a comic. In the last thread I tried to debunk the evidence in the most well-known of McCloud's arguments in favor of his theory of iconic images.
Understanding comics essay
In my view, graphic art is really the odd man out, since the only storytelling in that artform is of the indirect, implied kind. Regardless, it is still a discussion that is worth merit. Non-standard English Using Visuals as Key to Meaning Pictures that add humor-pictures are intended to make you laugh Pictures that add details-pictures that take less room to actually show in a picture than it would take to write it out Pictures that signal flashback or fantasycharacter is flashing back to an earlier point in his life or dreaming about something he wants to happen Literary Analysis-Visual Essay How are the characteristics of a persuasive essay accomplished in Understanding Comics? However, for Scott McCloud, merely because the medium of the comics is often popular in its audience does not mean that it cannot stimulate thought. But I part company most sharply with McCloud when he attempts to denegrate the more realistic approach to comics. For those participating in discussion and I hope that anyone who wants to will , What evidence in UC do you think is the most convincing in support of McCloud's thesis of Iconic images? Thanks for listening. Some comics fans and publishers have been unwisely biased against the cartoonish approach, overlooking a body of extremely important work. There is no extensive discussion of the history of prose fiction, the theater, or motion pictures. These are only the posts I wrote myself-- there are dozens of insightful posts by others which I haven't sought permission to reproduce, not having the space for them. I think not, for two reasons: First, McCloud suggests that the reader try smiling p.
How about movies that are a mixture of cartoons and photography? The interesting thing about the human face is that it is a template for communication.
But on p. If an analogy is called for, a better analogy would between comics and other visually-based storytelling forms, i. Reading comics as a scholar has taught McCloud about the way humans have evolved in relationship to print, the media, and even to deeper philosophical issues regarding the primacy of the word over the image in Western culture. But it doesn't happen. This is no doubt true, but what it contributes to the work as a whole depends on the circumstances. His ideas about comics as a unified language are self-contradictory. McCloud attempts to take a wide-ranging focus in contrast to Kunzle's more scholarly study. And he is valid in pointing out that comics can be disposable, even nasty, and one must not be too quick to valorize all comics. I would especially appreciate a PUBLIC discussion of these issues in comics' trade journals, art magazines, computer nets and any other forum. In the last thread I tried to debunk the evidence in the most well-known of McCloud's arguments in favor of his theory of iconic images. You tell me. Works Cited Kunzle, David. So for me, reading UC was like being a passenger in a car that's going a hundred miles an hour-- crying frantically, 'Where're you going?!? Think about it, then read on This is rather hard to do, because in recalling another person, I experience a montage of many impressions and ideas, one constantly overlaying another.
Rather than to locate early comics as something far away in history, and make pronouncements like Kunzle, McCloud ends his text by turning to the reader and saying: "This book is meant to stimulate debate, not to settle it," he tells us.
This is no doubt true, but what it contributes to the work as a whole depends on the circumstances. Because the image is so specific it can be read in any number of ways.
Kunzle may be at a disadvantage because he wrote his book before Maus and other graphic novels began to reconfigure the modern conception of comics.
Your mind won't LET you!
Understanding comics chapter 4
I think that most of the time, a specific, unique, individual character is the better artistic choice. For instance when I'm feeling really sore about something, and I'm walking down the street, I have an impression of myself that resembles an exaggerated cartoonish character with eyes glaring, steam coming out of his nostrils, and a big frown on his face. Perform the following actions or try to recollect when you last performed them after clearing your mind of any preconceptions of what the results will be: 1 With your eyes closed, cross the first and 2nd fingers of your right hand. I'd like to suggest another, more elaborate mind experiment. It's a superb example of the use of first-person perspective, and succeeds in sensitizing the reader to the presence of their own 'non-visual self-awareness. Watch out for that tree!!! Kunzle prefers instead to call comics sequential art narratives. His writing style has remained largely consistent, though this may be more due to the essay style these books are delivered in. He weaves a graphic novel about graphic novels that is at once playful and humorous, yet seeks to justify the existence of comics and their status as art. But before going further, I'd like to know: 1 Do you think this is a fair summary of McCloud's views?
based on 7 review