/lit/ - Literature

Why do you hate comics?

Its his porn, leave him alone.

>one of them is reading a comic book
I'mokaywiththis.jpg

Watchmen is taught in my AP Lit class... It's a very good lesson, my prof is an interesting dude...

>>implying that comic books aren't better than books

What is wrong with comic books? There shouldn't be as long as it is American.

That's really not that big of a deal. It's not like he's claiming it's literature or something.

So the fuck what?

>>500292
I don't hate comics I actually have a copy of Watchmen right in front of me I just don't want to see it in my English department.

Graphic novels are not english.

It takes a whole different set of skills to write a halfway decent graphic novel.

However, you are implying that reading something means that they should be reading prose. Thats no different than saying everyone who has sex should do missionary.

I'd be more worried about the guy wearing the princess crown and pink thing.

Also the woman with the bust has a course on "Harry Potter and the Literary Tradition"

>>500325
Don't hate. He's trying to be cool and hip.

>>500325
The pink thing is supposed to be a boa, I believe. A costume one at that, much like the tiara.

>>500343
It's fine if knows he's gay. Otherwise... I have bad news for him.

>>500324
Watchmen isn't a graphic novel. It's a comic. There's a difference. Watchmen is often called a graphic novel, but as it was published in issues like a regular comic, it's a comic book.

>>500354
how it's read now, it's close enough to a graphic novel that nobody gives a fuck about the difference.
And it's good.
so get off your high horse.

You've got it easy. I'm go to a private school and my English teacher is a 20-something neckbeard who reads nothing but Marvel Comics. Imagine having /co/ as your English teacher.

It's very bad and I'm not exaggerating.

>>500363 I'm go to
in before joke

>>500284
>one of them is reading a comic book

Your point is...?

>>500363
>Imagine having /co/ as your English teacher.

So...awesome? Actually, /co/ would be reading more than Marvel, so a fragment of /co/, but still, awesome.

Watchmen is more "literary" than 90% of the novels you will read in your life, guaranteed.

>>500371
NO! Not awesome at all! Have you BEEN on /co/???

>>500376
Oh no it's not. You guys overrate it WAY too much. It's simply the best of an 'okay' media form.

>>500382
go tell that to Time Magazine.
BAM!

>>500376
You mean Watchmen is more 'literary' than 90% of comic books, right?

>>500376
Not really. It's compelling, certainly, but not "more literary".

>>500380

Yes, yes I have. My statement still stands.

>>500383
Didn't TIME magazine put it in the GRAPHIC NOVEL section, not the book section?

Either way, fuck Time Magazine. They sucked Meyer's cock when Twilight first came out and called it better than Harry Potter. This is before the Twilight fanbase came into existence, mind you.

>>500382
>It's simply the best of an 'okay' media form.

Watchmen isn't anywhere near the best comics have to offer, but it is great.

>>500390
>Didn't TIME magazine put it in the GRAPHIC NOVEL section, not the book section?

Nope.

>http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,1951793,00.html
>U - W
>4. Watchmen (1986), by Alan Moore & Dave Gibbons

"All-TIME Graphic Novels" is below it.

>>500390
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/completelist/0,29569,1951793,00.html

I don't even feel like quoting all of you, but here's the deal (and it's the opinion espoused by Art Spiegelman, and since he made Maus that makes it legit, right?):

Graphic novels are comics. Watchmen, Persepolis, Maus, Our Home, Blankets, Summer Blonde, Ghost World, and Spawn are all comics. Comics are the medium. Graphic novels are just longer versions of the same thing.

Bad movies are still movies. Bad books are still books. Bad comics are still comics. Good comics are still comics. They are all one thing.

Also, consider the tern "novel." How long has the novel been a commonly-used literary form? Actually, it's only been such since the early 18th century (not that it didn't exist before, but it wasn't considered literary for quite some time). Have you ever thought of what the word "novel" means? It was coined as such because it was new. I mean hell, Eliza Haywood was one of the leading writers of the early novel and most of what she wrote was slut (hell, I think all of them were).

Comics are becoming increasingly literary. At its greatest potential, comics are half literature, and half graphic art. That is what they can be, that's what they are becoming, ideally the best of both worlds.

tl;dr comics are awesome, some of you need to brush up on the ideas behind novels in general.

>>500390
Harry Potter really isn't that much better than Twilight. They're on the same level.

I don't even feel like quoting all of you, but here's the deal (and it's the opinion espoused by Art Spiegelman, and since he made Maus that makes it legit, right?):

Graphic novels are comics. Watchmen, Persepolis, Maus, Our Home, Blankets, Summer Blonde, Ghost World, and Spawn are all comics. Comics are the medium. Graphic novels are just longer versions of the same thing.

Bad movies are still movies. Bad books are still books. Bad comics are still comics. Good comics are still comics. They are all one thing.

Also, consider the tern "novel." How long has the novel been a commonly-used literary form? Actually, it's only been such since the early 18th century (not that it didn't exist before, but it wasn't considered literary for quite some time). Have you ever thought of what the word "novel" means? It was coined as such because it was new. I mean hell, Eliza Haywood was one of the leading writers of the early novel and most of what she wrote was smut (hell, I think all of her novels were).

Comics are becoming increasingly literary. At its greatest potential, comics are half literature, and half graphic art. That is what they can be, that's what they are becoming, ideally the best of both worlds.

tl;dr comics are awesome, some of you need to brush up on the ideas behind novels in general.

Typos corrected, my bad.

>>500430
How can it be half literature when literature is a written form and most of a comic book is just drawings?

>>500435
>and most of a comic book is just drawings?

Apparently you haven't been reading the right comics. If you actually read Watchmen, take a look at From Hell, or any major comic's script, you'll realize how much writing actually goes into them.

Alan Moore, insane eccentric that he is, writes pages and pages for every panel of comic.

Here, have a look, and this is for a Batman comic that he did: http://comicbookscriptarchive.com/goods/alanmoore/Killingjoke_10pages.doc

>>500443

Oh, and the reason that that script is all in capitals is because he refuses to write on anything other than an old manual type typewriter.

>>500435

But all of comics are based in writing. Even the paneling. In a book, dialogue is just a fraction of the story. Same with a comic. The writing goes beyond simply who is saying what in which text box. So much writing goes into the outlining, into the formation of the idea. Stand alone pictures don't tell a story, but comics do. The onus is on the writer to use as few words in a way that is visible to the reader, the ultimate show-and-not tell. Only instead of wading through lengthy descriptions, you can see the art, that's where the graphic art side of comics comes in.

I hope I'm explaining myself well, but if you don't with with comics you might not see how much writing really goes into their creation.

Insert obligatory recommendation of Understanding Comics by Scott McCloud.

>>500443

Speaking of Alan Moore, check out his Writing for Comics. His creative process is intimidating yet hilarious.

>>500447

Here's another script, this time the first issue of Grant Morrison's The Invisibles, which I recommend tremendously.

http://comicbookscriptarchive.com/goods/grantmorrison/Invisibles_1.txt

>>500284

>>500451

I actually have it, it's great.

Link for anyone that wants it.

http://rapidshare.com/files/36915924/freecomicbooks.blogspot.com_alan_moore_s_writing_for_comics.cbr

>>500376
Nah, what makes Watchmen big is the combination of image and word in a sequential art way.

Any comic is less "literary" than any book just because it also works with visual elements.

------------
Also, /co/ as teacher means someone easily trolled and bipolar as teacher... I don't see anything weird.

>>500459
Goodness me. Thank you.

>>500452

That's odd... that reads like a movie script rather than a comic script.

And yeah, Invisibles is amazing

>>500488

Comics scripts and movie scripts often look similar though, to my knowledge. All the ones I've ever seen do.

>>500301

I lol'd at OP getting owned

>>500491

No, what I mean is there are no page numbers, no division of scenes in panels, things like "CREDITS SEQUENCE" and "END THEME"... I think it may be a script for an Invisibles TV adaptation or something of the sort

>>500524

Grant Morrison does so many drugs that he doesn't need panel or page numbers.

I didn't really like Watchmen because Mr Manhattan was walking around through most of the comic naked. His chapter was also pretty depressing and I like comic books that make you feel good like Superman or Spider-man.

>>500308
Problem, bro?

>>500553
>>500553

20th century FUCK YEAH

Too bad dwindling sales will result in graphics novels and comics going the way of the dinosaur :)

>>500569
>Too bad dwindling sales will result in graphics novels and comics going the way of the dinosaur :)

Superhero movie deals make money, superhero movies make money, superhero movies give sales a boost, and big events and main titles still sell like gangbusters. I'm afraid that comics are no more leaving us than any other established medium.

>>500573

All of which funds the indie comics scene, like the Vertigo imprint for DC.

>>500284
UTM?

>>500569
You've, uh.

You've heard of webcomics, right?

If anything's fucked it's traditional publishing.

>>500588

There's a lot of webcomics that are published in book format, too.

I went to school for book illustration but I dabbled in a few sequential art classes (which is just what it says...think comic books or storyboarding). I don't necessarily feel like this means I know anymore than anyone else does on the subject but I can't help but put in my two cents.

They offered very specific writing classes "for screen and stage" which were suggested for those that wanted to write their own comics or graphic novels. They taught very similar things that you would learn in a normal creative writing class, such as character development and story arc (I'm not a writer so I don't want to speak too much on it and put my foot in my mouth). I think just because something isn't very linguistic doesn't mean it isn't very literary.

Graphic novels are no different than illustrated books...they are simply more "heavily" illustrated. I've read some very beautifully illustrated books that I would consider literary (two recent ones that come to mind are Jane Eyre and Gravity's Rainbow). I mention this because I feel like a lot of people assume that once a book has pictures it means it lacks words. In my humble opinion, I don't find it odd that a literature class might study a graphic novel...if it's a particularly literary one. Sometimes illustrations are there to provide a decorative or visual stimulant for the words and sometimes they are there to drive the story further for lack of written material. It really just depends. Just because comics or graphic novels have more pictures than your average book doesn't mean that the story or the language is lacking. It's simply a different style or approach to literature.

>>500573
It's relying on another industry for that though. It's not a good position at all, and leaves it vulnerable should superhero movies ever quit being popular. Which honestly, isn't on the horizon, but still. It's a BAD position to be in.

>>500670

> just because something isn't very linguistic doesn't mean it isn't very literary.

Literary is not a generic term of praise. Less emphasis on language, less literary.

>Graphic novels are no different than illustrated books

Just plain wrong. Illustrated books are driven by words and accented by pictures. Comic books tell stories through pictures and are accented by words.

>>500705

I didn't mean to use "literary" as praise and I'm sorry that it read that way. I realize that I misspoke in an earlier section of my comment and should have used a different term.

However, my entire sentence (and even the paragraph following):

"Graphic novels are no different than illustrated books...they are simply more "heavily" illustrated."

means exactly what it says, which is quite different than what it meant when you quoted half of it.

One of them isn't reading at all, he's just standing there.

>>500768

No, I know what you meant. There is a fundamental difference that being "more heavily illustrated" does not at all cover. Even if you made a copy of Gravity's Rainbow with a greater ratio of pictures to words than the average comic book, it would still be an illustrated novel if the words were what told the story. Literature is words and words only. Pictures are irrelevant to literature. It isn't an approach to literature at all, they are fundamentally different forms.