For Monday, please post your response to the questions we posed in class today: how does reading a graphic novel/memoir differ from reading a novel? how does Alison Bechdel's use of images affect our understanding of her narrative?
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
31 comments:
Reading a graphic novel differs from reading a regular novel for many reasons. A graphic novel reads a lot quicker than a traditional novel. This is probably because there are less words on the page. The minimal amount of words on the page also make the reading easier. Instead of analyzing every word and phrase on the page one can take more time to just enjoy the story.
Although the smaller percentage of words do make the reading of a graphic novel take less time, one must take extra time in examining the graphics on the page. The graphic element of the novel creates an extra element that is lacking in a traditional work of fiction. The graphics can show things that words simply cannot. After reading the words above the graphic one can analyze the picture and understand exactly what Bechdel really means. The graphics can also show irony that eluded the reader upon only reading the caption.
In many ways, reading a graphic novel can be much more direct and clear in terms of understanding the author’s main idea or theme of his or her story. When reading a regular novel, the reader is given the power to interpret ideas and imagine certain scenes upon the instinct of his or her own imagination. In contrast, when reading a graphic novel, the reader is not only presented with a descriptive text, but also with very specific images supporting the themes and ideas of the author. While many might fear that the author’s incorporation of illustrations somewhat confine or limit the reader, images can also act as another medium open for interpretation. I see Bechdel’s work as a double- sided novel, as both her text and images are highly detailed and complex. Because two mediums are incorporated in the author’s work, Bechdel gives the reader more to look for.
Along these same lines of thought, Bechdel’s incorporation of her images drastically change the way we read her novel. A small example of how her illustrations change our understanding might be the distinct uncomfortable facial expressions of her mother and her father. In addition to these techniques, Bechdel also incorporates several hidden objects (mainly symbols and books) which allude to her father’s depressive and secretive lifestyle. Several times throughout the book, Bechdel uses images to position her father as both a hero and an anti- hero. An example of his heroic portrayal might be how Bruce Bechdel is positioned like Christ when he carries a pillar upon his back. Bechdel also presents her father as an anti-hero through both text and images regarding the ancient Greek myth of Daedalus and Icarus.
In conclusion, a graphic novel can either be effective or disruptive. Perhaps one can relate this idea to how a great song might have a terrible music video or vise versa. In the case of Bechdel’s novel, it seems that her construction of text and incorporation of images deeply enhances her memoir.
Reading a graphic novel is a wholly different experience from the traditional form. Although it is easy to move quickly through the pages it is essential to force yourself to slow down and absorb the images. I find the experience of a graphic novel to be more challenging than a traditional text. Personally, I find the experience to be less engrossining. In an all text format I as a reader reader have more authority to imagine characters and settings whereas in a graphic novel the author dictates the images. This causes me to step back from the flow of the narrative to examine the images. It makes me much more aware of the authorial voice.
I am really enjoying Fun Home and think that Bechdel does a tremendous job of presenting her personal narrative in this very atypical format. I have always thought of graphic novels as being the domain of science fiction and fantasy so it is really refreshing to find a memoir presented in this style. It is surprisingly effective and remarkable how such a profoundly personal story can be conveyed with the use of images. I definitely look forward to reading more texts in this style.
Like Jessica, I previously related graphic novels almost exclusively to science fiction and fantasy. At first, I didn't treat the material seriously because I suspected I wouldn't be able to connect with a work written in "comic book" form. I was wrong (what else is new)-- I really like Fun Home thus far.
Throughout my reading, I tried to separate the illustrations from the text and analyze their individual importance. In my opinion, the illustrations convey more of the story i.e. they are more easily and completely understood without the text than the text is without the illustrations. Is this because visual art is Bechdel's primary creative outlet? I thought a lot about her choice of words, since there are so few. It seems to me that it'd be harder to write succinctly (as Bechdel does) given the autobiographical nature of the material than it would be to flood the pages with tons of lengthy, explanatory paragraphs. Obviously the work is best examined as a combination of illustration and text; however, it's interesting to consider what roles each art form (prose and image) fulfills in aiding the reader's understanding of the complete work. Perhaps it is different for everyone.
I especially like the frequent juxtaposition of serious prose and humorous image, and oppositely, humorous prose paired with serious, symbolic image. The work as a whole has a great sense of humor, yet remains grounded because it deals with heavy, relevant issues. Bechdel's Fun Home has something for everyone.
Alex Talks
Fun Home is definitely different from the traditional novel for a lot of reasons. I'm not used to the concept of graphic novels because I have always been a fan of the traditional novel and not into a more comic book style. The pictures in a graphic novel play a huge role in understanding the way the writer wants to portray their dialogue. This is entirely different from the traditional novel where you interpret what the characters are conveying and for me, takes away some of the imagination of reading. Fun Home does read very easily though and the graphics play a large role in the overall understanding of the story, although I am old fashioned in the regard that I still love the traditional novel.
Reading a graphic novel for me was very different just because when I was younger I was never big on comic books, I usually preferred the more traditional novel, and if I ever did read comics it was only a few select strips from the Sunday morning paper. Although I really liked Fun Home. I find that when I read traditional novels, I'm sure like most people, I picture what's going on in my head. With Fun Home the images were right there in front of me so I could see it as Alison Bechdel wanted me to see it.
One thing that I was kind of nervous about when reading Fun Home was whether I would be confused on how to navigate the graphics or not and I found that surprisingly I wasn't. When reading Fun Home I found that I could naturally just follow the pattern of the images. I also found that if you read the words over top the graphic and then the words within the square within the graphic and finally the thought bubbles, that was usually a pretty good way to go about things.
Reading a graphic novel for me was very different just because when I was younger I was never big on comic books, I usually preferred the more traditional novel, and if I ever did read comics it was only a few select strips from the Sunday morning paper. Although I really liked Fun Home. I find that when I read traditional novels, I'm sure like most people, I picture what's going on in my head. With Fun Home the images were right there in front of me so I could see it as Alison Bechdel wanted me to see it.
One thing that I was kind of nervous about when reading Fun Home was whether I would be confused on how to navigate the graphics or not and I found that surprisingly I wasn't. When reading Fun Home I found that I could naturally just follow the pattern of the images. I also found that if you read the words over top the graphic and then the words within the square within the graphic and finally the thought bubbles, that was usually a pretty good way to go about things.
The thing that I find interesting about reading a graphic novel over a regular novel is the amount of control the author has over the reader. Now they are able to more specifically transmit their emotions and intentions through character's facial expressions, shadows, setting, etc and that is not left up to the reader anymore. Personally, I think that the graphic novel is a great medium for serious writers and I hope that it will be exploited more in the coming years. In case anyone hasn't read "Watchmen," a DC comics graphic novel by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, I would highly recommend it.
Finally! I am going to try to make this as objective as I possibly can given the subject matter. Now I know a lot of traditionalist are going to say that the GN (graphic novel) is a lower caliber to the "regular" novel. Well, I challenge you to read, The Watchmen and say the same thing. Reading a graphic novel differs from the regular novel reading in many different ways. I will give you that the typical GN has a lot less words on a page than the traditional novel, but it can still convey the same meaning and same amount of poetry. A GN is very different in that they take two mediums and combine them to make a story. They take "art" meaning drawing or painting to combine them with writing to create a good story. This my friend is not an easy thing to do, I can show you cases where it really works and believe me I can show you cases where it truly did not work. Anyway back to my point in the traditional novel you do not have that combination, just writing. The other difference is that most graphic novels are created by a team, meaning you have the head writer and the head artist. This team needs to come together to create not only really good art, have an incredible story that coincides with the story. If this is done correctly the artists and the writer can tell a story with no extra writing blocks, it can be strictly dialogue and thought bubbles, and maybe a characters inner monologue. A really good team can accomplish this. I think that some graphic novels have a bad reputation because in some the art is of low quality, but that is just not the case in all GNs. Alex Ross and Mark Waid came together to create an incredible story, with breath taking art to go along with it. Yes, GNs can take a shorter amount of time, there are some GNs I have honestly finished cover to cover in one day, but that does not tarnish the meaning of them. I have not read a novel that has inspired me the way The Long Halloween has, or Batman Year One. For instance lets bring up Frank Miller, one of the most celebrated authors in the industry. He has written some of the most respected Batman graphic novels ever; Batman Year One, Batman The Dark Knight Returns, Batman The Dark Knight Strikes Again, even though the last one is not as respected as others, and we won't even mention All Star Batman and Robin. Now Frank Miler is also the author of Sin City and three hundred, two movies that have gone on to have great film success. So GNs are becoming more acceptable in the mainstream media as well. I have kind of went of track here. Anyway GN differs from traditional novels in many ways. You are telling a story by pictures and words. The pictures add an element of energy to the page. It helps convey the emotion or the action on the page better. A GN takes the al the descriptive words out of a traditional novel and turns them into a picture. Instead of saying it is a cold and stormy night with lightening flashing, I have to pause for a moment, my breathing is heavy as hot cloud emerges from my mouth with every breathe. I continue to move on when out from the deep abysmal darkness a man stumbles out, weak and trembling. Instead of writing all that they would draw it on a three by three panel in one page. In my opinion if you want to analyze a GN you should take the time to analyze the pictures as well as the words. It does a disservice to the artists and the inkers to count out their art. A GN can have a certain element of irony that can play off the words and the pictures that is just hard for a traditional novel to convey. In my opinion GNs the good ones convey so much more emotion at least show the characters emotion so much more. I also think that the GNs can play with reality a bit more than most novels can. A GN is an art form that has just been getting a lot of praise. I think that it should be introduced into the schools. I was not excited abut reading, until I started reading graphic novels. A good GN is filled with so much, good art, good story, emotion, irony, action, pain, love, hurt, beautiful pictures or sometimes simple pictures that can still convey the same meaning. The differences between lets say Sin City and Kingdom Come on an art scale alone are phenomenal. Sin City has really dark, simple black and white pictures, with a little bit of color through out. While Kingdom Come, has bright, very detailed, colorful art, where sometimes it feels like I am looking at a picture. Both great graphic novels, both fun to read. A GN is a lot like the traditional novel in that it has a lot of variety, and many different genres. Do not b so quick to lump them all together. The GN has fans as dedicated if not more so in some respects. The GN offers to take you to place where traditional novels just can't go. A world of different imagination they help you see what a character looks like, what they are doing and feeling. I hold the GN in as high of respect as I do the traditional novel.
Fun Home is a lot different from any book that I have ever read. This is the first graphic novel I have read. I just started reading it, but I have notice many differences between a traditional novel and a graphic novel.
I feel that I am reading through the graphic novel a lot quicker than I would a traditional novel. Obviously there are fewer words on each page so I seem to be getting through it faster, but I also think its easier to read because I don't have to analyze the words and try to figure out the message the author is trying to convey. In graphic novels it is very clear what the author is trying to get across, it is right their in the picture. So far, I have really enjoyed reading Fun Home.
Graphic novels/comic books are often looked at as being "easier" than a traditional novel. I suppose that is true in the sense that they can be read faster and it is simpler to soak everything in. But I think graphic novels have a distinct advantage over a novel in regards to being able to focus on the story. Any and all time that would normally be used to set up time, place, character appearances, etc can instead be used to add to the depth of the story.
Graphic novels also have many of the same characteristics of traditional novels, just conveyed in different ways. The way a certain writer writes, or how they work with the artist to tell the story are just as visible (literally and figuratively) as the style and prose of specific author.
It has been an interesting experience reading Fun Home. I've never read a graphic novel before this one and to be honest I was leery to begin the text. Overall I am not a big fan of contemporary fiction but I have found Bechdel to be a refreshing change from the other authors we've read this quarter. Where several authors have relied heavily on the use of extremely sexual scenes as well as profane text Bechdel somehow writes a novel about sexuality and coming of age without being incredibly sexual. As several of my fellow students have pointed out Fun Home, due to the immense amount of pictures, is a very quick read. While it is a quick read, that in a way makes it a bit more difficult to complete. You have to be careful when reading to take the time to analyze the images and not just fly through the text.
I have found that Fun Home keeps my attention much more easily than the other novels I've read this quarter. I find myself more engaged by the text and more interested in the plot. I must applaud Bechdel for not only so blatantly announcing her homosexuality but doing so in an almost joking manner. Fun Home is an interesting and intense read that I would certainly recommend to anyone interested in literature.
I hope this is our homework spot. Reading a graphic novel vs. reading a regular novel differs in many ways. I find I am able to read it much faster and really see how the author views a certain situation. Like I said in class on Friday, when you read a regular novel you develop your own picture of particualr scenes. But reading a graphic novel, you get to see the author's own picture. For example on page 186, the last picture. There is her drawing of Nixon.
Although, a faster reader I find that I spend extra time looking at the pictures. The only complaint I have is about the volgarity of the novel. Some pictures and/or words (you know what I mean) I think the story could go without. But who am I to judge another's memoir? I do like/respect that she is a writer that does not sugar coat things, and she had the confidence to write such things.
I do wonder if after writing this she had the support of her mother and sibilings because it does show a "not so good" side of her family. And sharing a family secret as she did can also come with some "not so good" commentary.
Comparing the graphic novel to the traditional novel really is a matter of comparing pros and cons across two mediums. The graphic novel is really adept at using images to quickly portray things that the written word struggles to eloquently say. This is why superheroes fit so well in the comic format. Images are great for portraying action, which is something they usually emphasize. While Fun Home does not have any superheroes, it still uses the strength of the image. One example is on the middle of page 33, where the house the Bechdel family lived in for a short time is shown. In a traditional novel, a paragraph or two would have to be dedicated to describing the house if the author really wanted the reader to “see” it and their best efforts may still not work or simply bore the reader. In Fun Home, the image is right there and every reader knows exactly what the author intended. Much the same could be said for the frame on the bottom of page 78. An author could describe what her journal looked like with smeared blood in the traditional novel, but in the graphic novel it is immediately apparent what is being portrayed. Of course the downside to graphic novels is that if there is something like a small change in someone’s expression, images (especially simplified ones like in Fun Home) struggle to show the change. However, someone’s change in mood can easily be described in a sentence or two in the traditional novel. Also, the graphic novel tends to have more difficulty portraying lots of dialogue or description where the traditional novel excels at this task. Of course, with the traditional novel using more images throughout the text, the line between the two mediums could become blurred as time goes on.
I have thoroughly enjoyed reading Fun Home so far and it is a perfect time for a quicker read with exams coming up. With that said, if there is one thing it might be criticized for, it is that Fun Home doesn’t show some of the innovation in the format or even go a step further and challenge the way we read a graphic novel. I don’t think Fun Home ever sets out to do this, but there are times where I wish it would take a few more chances. In many ways, the design resembles the daily (or weekly) comics in a newspaper which are pretty familiar to most readers. I may or may not have read a graphic novel or two that actually challenges how you read a page with speech bubbles going every which way and/or uniquely shaped frames that force you to read in other ways than just left to right, top to bottom like a traditional book. The medium can be just an interesting and innovative as any novel you’ll ever come across and I think some people’s stereotypes and conceptions that graphic novels can’t be taken seriously or a worthwhile read would be erased. After all, many of the best and most popular movies to come out recently have been lifted straight from comics. That seems to beg the question: why aren’t more people interested in reading them?
I really like reading this graphic novel. I don't necessarily just like it because it is a graphic novel, although it takes a lot less time which is nice. But I also think that Bechdel does a great job in telling her story in a compelling and easy to understand way. I also think that a graphic novel is an efficient way to tell a story because you will never be confused because the pictures explain exactly what the author is trying to get across to the readers. Reading Fun Home is unlike anything I have ever read before because I was never really into comic books and I only related graphic novels to comic books.
I'd never read a graphic novel before and I must say I was pleasantly surprised. It was extremely easy to read and the graphics were very simple to follow. The sense of having to follow the author's idea of exactly what each character looks like was a completely different experience than when reading a traditional novel. Although, the difference did not necessarily provide as an out to envisioning people and expressions, instead it gave me a chance to evaluate not only the text but also the images. Many times, it was hard to determine why certain characters were nonchalant or excited.
Reading a graphic novel seemed like it was almost more fun simply because of the childlike symbolism of a comic book. I felt like I was rebelling against the graphic novel in reading this for a literature class even though the ideas brought to you by the author are just as deeply rooted as would be in a traditional novel. I did find myself skipping pictures because of the habit to follow the text and it was very similar to skipping to footnotes. BUT the big difference was that it wasn't mid-sentence and so I wasn't annoyed by it. I really enjoyed reading this book. It definitely opened my eyes to different types of literature.
Wow, posting late is like reporting the news of yesterday.
I see the form of Bechdel's graphic novel (the side-by-side pictures and text) to work very similar to a novel. For example, if I were to have a character say "I love you," it inspires warm feelings, optimism, etc etc (maybe not to everyone but hold on!) but if I had a character say '"I love you too," she responded with her finger-tips on her downcast head,"' it may suggest something different: inner-life. People don't just say things and mean them all the time, and even the novel format acknowledges that much.
Though a graphic novel simplifies certain aspects of the novel (descriptive language in terms of setting or the way things look in general), it also brings up new issues to the author. Namely the reliance of the success of the work on the reader's sharp eye, as it were. The other side of that coin is the difficulty in not seeming heavy-handed with imagery to the attentive and perceptive reader. ah, but of course these are the same problems that novelists face as well. But it seems like Bechdel plays with this problem with the small arrows included in the scenery explaining, in a very self-aware way, the nature of the setting and images therein.
While it’s true that in reading a graphic novel the words on the page are illustrated for you, leaving less room for interpretation in some respects. Others might argue that it simply supplies more content to be examined by the reader, simply in another medium. I tend to fall into the latter category. The images that accompany the text in this memoir adds a depth to the story that it wouldn’t have had otherwise. The words and images play on each other as she uses them for innuendo and to draw comparisons throughout the text.
It was interesting to dissect the image panels and find little hints and bits of foreshadowing scattered about the scenes. For instance, the Sunbeam bread symbol scattered through the book whether it was the bread bag in the background while discussing her mothers divorce at their kitchen table or otherwise, in allusion to her father’s death by the truck bearing the same logo. It made for an interesting read.
The differences between the two types of novels, for me, is very great. Personally, I love graphic novels. I read my first graphic novel, Maus I and II my freshman year and I remember what a different and pleasurable experience it was. I am easily distracted. I can read a page of a book and then realize I have no idea what it said. I found myself completely enthralled in reading a graphic novel. It is no doubt easier, therefore in some cases more enjoyable- Many times when I read a novel I spend time not only analyzing but drawing a picture in my mind of people, places, things, etc. Mostly I enjoy doing this, using real people to play the characters in my book, but there is something about having it all mapped out for you that is really nice. I associate a graphic novel with comic books, which I have never been a fan of- However, one thing I can appreciate in any form of literature is dialogue. I suppose reading anything with graphics, presents itself to me similar to a movie. The graphic novel is not necessarily better than alternative, or more enjoyable, just enjoyable in a different way.
I feel like reading this book is much easier than the other readings we have been reading. The pictures make the story flow, and provides a different type of experience. I found myself breezing through the book without looking to see wht time it was or how much progress I was making. By providing drawings with the dialog I felt like I was getting to know Bechdel. My mind was not wandering while I read, trying to create my own images of all the characters. By not focusing on these iterpretive images I was able to engross myself withthe reading. This may seem like I prefer mindless picture books, but I definitely felt more compelled to read this selection. It kept my interest through images and did not leave my mind wondering and scrolling over boring words.
It's interesting to compare graphic novels with novels, because while I breeze through a graphic novel much quicker than a novel, I find that I have to break my "flow" more often. I have to stop after reading the dialogue to take in all the illustrations. Thus, while a graphic novel may be a quicker read, it definitely adds a visual depth that adds some time.
The images definitely add a different element to the story that differs from a novel. It takes away a bit of the imagination, the opportunity for the brain to visualize what's happening. At the same time, Bechdel's illustrations make up for what the reader's brain can't create, the author's visual perspective. There's also an art to the graphic novel, similar to film. There's a purpose behind the positioning of each character, and how drawings are shadowed, etc.
I have never read an actual graphic/comic book. I’ve not been one to get into those that well. I can read the comic strips in the Sunday news paper but never was interested to read an actual book. I do like that the author does incorporate the pictures because she is getting every specific to her story. Most novels have to be very detailed in order to get exactly what the author is saying; with Alison Bechdel's novel she’s able to show what she is picturing in her mind. She doesn’t have to describe it in the book, maybe because she’s never been able to be specific, so she gets specific with the pictures. Reading Fun Home has been very easy to read, and I’ve never read a book about lesbians before but it’s been interesting so far!
The graphic novel is just as effective a tool for telling a story as a standard novel. Being much less common (an much less commonly taught), a graphic novel is nice change of pace for a reader. One huge difference is the amount of text between the two. Even though the graphic novel is lacking in words, it holds no less meaning. Story elements can be found in the text and pictures, but it can also be found in the size and shape of the borders and even in font changes.
Bechdel presents her novel in a fairly straightforward way (for a graphic novel). She doesn't vary her text font. Instead, she uses combinations of dialogue and box captions point out details and give certain scenes an ironic or darker feel. On a few instances, the art detail changes. This effectively shows the transition between the story and the representations of other stories within the story.
I have been looking forward to reading Fun Home for a long time, since over the summer my aunt mentioned what a good read it was and suggested I take a look at it. As it was for several others, Fun Home was my first graphic novel, so getting started reading was a little bit like putting my feet into a cold pool - I had to go slowly at first. Since I was aware of the basic premise of the book, I was basically just leery of the format and unsure as to how I would like it as I read. Surprisingly, Bechdel found a way to induce a flow in the book that leaves little question as to the order to read, somehow arranging the comic boxes so that the eye can move between them in order.
Because I have never been particularly interested in reading comic books, I wasn't sure how I would feel about reading a graphic novel as opposed to a traditional one. However, I found that reading Fun Home was pretty enjoyable and I actually really liked the format. I'm a big annotator, and I felt like the pages of the book were almost inviting me to add my own two cents anywhere, rather than being forced into typical margins. This was a great book to finish up the quarter with, and particularly a good one to read over a holiday because (for me, at least) reading it was almost effortless.
-Alison Dzwonczyk
A graphic novel lends itself to those people that are more visually inclined. With the pictures there is no need for lengthy explanations of setting and mood. If anything, a graphic novel more resembles a play than a novel; all the stage directions are drawn out for you. Incidentally, I took out a movie from the library called PERSEPOLIS based on the graphic novel of the same name. I never read the book but the movie was pretty good.
Alison Bechdel has created, in my opinion, an emotionally charged and dynamic creative work with you memoir Fun Home. The Graphic novel always seems more of a challenge for me because it leaves less room for interpretation. Fun Home, which addresses complex subject matter triumphs as a beautiful tale of life experience. The images move the story as if the reader was flipping through Bechdel's family photo album, but the story reads more like her personal journal, and not the compulsive one she kept as a child with the "i think" symbols covering the entries. The memoir is is experienced in a unique way with the graphic novel because of the monotone colors it literally looks as if it is a dream sequence as dreams are often depicted in film as either black and white or blurred. Because of the line on page 73 "Such freedom from convention was intoxicating," I saw this as Alison's so called mantra behind her unique format for her memoir, as if the unique nature in which she tells her story frees her of some of the turmoil she has gone through with her family and the self interspection of her sexuality. In addition the images help to immortalize the images of her memory immortalizing the connection and sometimes misconnection with her father. I imagine the graphic novel is a challenge to produce especially to recreate the intimate details of ones own life experience but in my opinion Bechel has achieved a beautiful accomplishment and created such a definitive REAL connection with her audience.
Fun Home is an interesting novel. I understand the author's intentions of adding a comic book feel and helping the reader visualize the story. No problem with that at all. There's a fan base out there for this type of novel and that's cool with me. But, the more I think about David Foster Wallace and his take on how television has influenced literature, I can't help but think I'm trying to visualize a re-run of some TV show. I'm pretty much with the group of people who look at the comic book style and think of a young boy or girl who like looking at the pictures more than the words. I read a graphic novel of Spider-Man by Todd McFarlene when I was thirteen or fourteen and thought that was neat. I'm hitting this roadblock where, from my background, the social norm was that comic books are not supposed to be read by adults, or else that means your a thirty-something nerd living in your parent's basement with every copy of Superman or the Hulk lined up on each of the walls in plastic, untouched by human hands, working at a store that sells Poke'mon cards. Like the comic book guy from the Simpsons, he's the guy I think of when it comes to comic books. (I'm not saying I'm that harsh. I'm a nice guy.) Bechdel's portrayal of her troubled life should be seen, as Joe put it, "good art, good story, emotion, irony, action, pain, love, hurt, beautiful pictures or sometimes simple pictures that can still convey the same meaning" as words. I can respect what she put into her novel and what it means for graphic novels, but there is still a part of me that doesn't want to yell at my mom for meatloaf every night at the age of thirty-five, ya know?
Fun House was a novel of many firsts for me. It was the first novel I had ever read that dealt openly with a lesbian and her issues, it was the first book I have read in a scholastic environment that addressed the topic of homosexuality as the primary narrative, and it was the first graphic novel I have ever read anywhere, for any reason. Now, for its differences between traditional modes of literature, ones with more words than pictures... I would have to say that Fun House is more fun as a graphic novel than it probably would have been totally written down or even as a fully motion picture. As a motion picture, it would have blended in to the horde of Miramax indies that deal with similar themes and characters, and as a totally written work it would have lost its seeming originality and charm. The main characters don't leap tall buildings in a single bound, nor do they ever have tingling spider senses. They extraordinary yet ultimately natural lives, which is not something you might initially expect when you pick up a "comic book." The visual medium is sometimes superior for certain types of stories, although I'm not always sure why. I prefer the Lord of the Rings movies to the films, but in the same vein of fantasy, I prefer to read Harry Potter or Narnia or The Wizard of Oz, etc. Most people, given the time it takes to watch the LotR trilogy would have a more profound understanding of Tolkien's vision than someone trying to read the 1,000 + page epic in the same timespan.
Fun House = Fun Home
(bleh)
Post a Comment