Out of the list of contemporary comics provided, I decided to read Jimmy Corrigan by Chris Ware. It was an easy read, I breezed through it surprisingly quick. For such a long comic, it divided itself into relatively short segments, ranging from fantastical adventures of young Jimmy Corrigan to the real life of elder Jimmy talking on the phone with his mother. The comic was illustrated in a simple linear style, black and white with clean lines. However, despite its simple visual appearance, the comic was much darker than I expected. For how short the segments of subjects were, and how simple it is visually, it is deceiving when you actually read the content. The comic is very dark, and though simple, it hits you for the few panels you read. I felt so sad after reading something as short as six panels. Chris Ware illustrates loneliness and abandonment. I was so taken aback when first reading it; a comic so visually simple and yet had this uncomfortable piercing effect on me. I was only able to read through the entire comic once, though I feel like I need to read through it at least two more times in order to truly surpass the simplicity and darkness.
It was only until class that I realized, this quality is exactly what makes this comic literature. Great literary works take multiple readings or in-depth discussion in order to comprehend it. Literary works were meant to be read multiple times, and understood differently depending on what point in your life you're reading it. I'm sure it would take me some several readings to understand the work, but if I read it later in life, I would feel differently about it compared to my 21 year old self right now.
It had been hotly debated whether comics could be considered literature. My initial thought was "sure they can," however I did not think of what would define them as so. What separates Garfield from Maus, the serious subject matter? The dark, complex underground style reflected in the aesthetic? Jimmy Corrigan certainly disproves the latter with its clean lines. It wasn't until class until class that I realized what makes great literature is not necessarily what is in the work itself, but the work's effect on the reader. If it is thought provoking and impactful, then certainly any work that falls under these lines, whether a novel written in the 1900s or a graphic novel written five years ago, can be considered literature.
It had been hotly debated whether comics could be considered literature. My initial thought was "sure they can," however I did not think of what would define them as so. What separates Garfield from Maus, the serious subject matter? The dark, complex underground style reflected in the aesthetic? Jimmy Corrigan certainly disproves the latter with its clean lines. It wasn't until class until class that I realized what makes great literature is not necessarily what is in the work itself, but the work's effect on the reader. If it is thought provoking and impactful, then certainly any work that falls under these lines, whether a novel written in the 1900s or a graphic novel written five years ago, can be considered literature.
No comments:
Post a Comment