/lit/ - Literature

>>19905791
>The point of classification of art is to aid in interpreting it.
Not entirely.
>you don't look at a painting and analyse the rhyming
Oh really? (pic). You're hiding behind semantics and wasting time.
>The visual aspect of comics is completely disruptive to interpreting comic narratives as novels
Just because they're a hybrid with visual art doesn't make them unrelated to literature. (Aside, comics are also different in that they can express silence/pause whereas novels cannot...but that extra doesn't make them not literature).
>It's about as meaningful as to call comics a type of painting.
No it isn't because paintings don't have to be sequential whereas that's what defines a comic/graphic novel.
>Also, Britannica doesn't actually classify comics as literature (see the article "Comic strip"), it only classifies "graphic novels" that way
We're discussing graphic novels.
> that term is bullshit
See >>19905769.