[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 178 KB, 400x600, 1462_400x600.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4303948 No.4303948[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Are comics considered literature?

>> No.4303961

>>4303948

No.

>> No.4303963

Absolutely not.

>> No.4303964

>>4303948

Depends on who you ask.

>> No.4303972

City of Glass is, watchmen isnt.

>> No.4303974

no

>> No.4303980

No, it's a different form of art. That's not a value judgement.

>>4303972
That's an adaptation of literature.

>> No.4303987
File: 41 KB, 350x468, fromhell_cover_lg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4303987

Don't see why not, really.

Also, posting best Moore.

>> No.4303992

In a sense the original script is just as much a piece of literature as a screenplay however when it is made into a comic it is probably more suitable to call it a piece of art

>> No.4303996

>>4303992
But literature is a piece of art aswell. Why aren't comics just counted as a subform of literature?

>> No.4303999

>>4303996
Comics are a hybrid form of art, containing traces of literature and also traces of other 'purer' art forms.

>> No.4304005

Whats with so many people creaming their pants over watchmen? Its a decent comic, but there are better ones out there. I'd argue most of Jasons work now is better than watchman in terms of utalizing the genre to its fullest extent, and there are plenty of comics that use refrence and cultural context in a more satisfying way than "lol superheros" (that peaunuts strip the last panel removed comes to mind, and I remember reading a great comic about an african american guitar player written in the syle of tintin which I found paticularly charming and clever).

>> No.4304007

>>4303999
Does that mean they shouldn't be also judged like literature? Atleast the literary part of them?

During my germanistic study I actually had a seminar about Moore, as literature. Sure, we didn't ignore that there are pictures, too. But I don't really get why people refuse to acknowledge the literary aspect of comics so much.

>> No.4304018

>>4304007
No, I agree. It's partially literature. I don't think it should be studied in literature classes though. There are enough works of proper literature out there that deserve to be studied above even the very best comic book (which is not Watchmen, btw.)

>> No.4304028

>>4304018
I think atleast peaking at comics for one semester is worth it if only to study the differences between describing text and pictures. You learn the most about a medium if you compare it to others - for the same reason I had one seminar about early russian films, and I actually wrote a 20 pages essay about narrative in video games (compared to narrative in movies).

Sure, there are way more good "pure" works of literature than there are good comics, but you don't study literature to get a top 100 list of books you should read. That's what you do in your own spare time.

>> No.4304032

They can be enjoyable and perhaps 'profound' in some instances. But no, they could never be considered literature.

>> No.4304039

>>4303961
>>4303963
>>4303974
>>4304032
>snobs

>> No.4304040

>>4304032
Which ones did you read?
It seems like your definition of literature is bound to quality, not to a medium.

>> No.4304067

>>4303987
This. I don't see the point debating Watchmen when we could all be agreeing on From Hell.

>> No.4304070

No, its a fundamentally different form of art. Rather than using prose or grammar structure comics use panel layout and composition. It relies on people to read information on a visual level rather than a textual level.

>> No.4304091

>>4303948
Literary qualities, obviously, but not quite literature, in that it robs the reader of some of the processes intimately involved in prose and poetry etc.

>> No.4304093
File: 369 KB, 1178x815, McCloud Comic Definition(2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4304093

>>4304039
>plebs
read 'understanding comics' by scott mccloud

it has its critics but it's a fascinating read, even if you don't give a fuck about comics

he tries to answer the question "what is comics?" and he concludes that comics is not literature nor a hybrid of arts

>> No.4304117

>>4303948
>Are comics considered literature?
No.

There's an easy test: if it still makes sense once you remove all the pictures, then it's literature. If not, then it's something else.

>> No.4304120

>>4304117
So letters aren't pictures now?

>> No.4304122

>>4304093
It's most definitely a hybrid. How could you possibly dispute this?

>> No.4304211

>>4304120
>So letters aren't pictures now?
Letters aren't pictures. Letters are abstract symbols.

(Not even the Chinese have pictures for letters.)

>> No.4304214

>>4304211
they are pictures that depict abstract symbols

>> No.4304215

>>4304214
>they are pictures that depict abstract symbols
No. Symbols aren't pictures.

>> No.4304566

>>4304122
I'd argue that it has enough of a divergent culture and that the use of minimalism and time is enough to seperate it from being veiwed as a hybrid.
If you rated, say, peanuts or jason simply based on the artwork or words present youd probably think them as pretty poor, but if you look at it within the context of "comic", it becomes an amazing work of art.
If you want an exammple of a hybrid, look at picture books

>>4304117
There are comics, usually not very good ones, where you can do this though.

>> No.4304575

>>4304215
And comics using symbols to convey ideas (maus, for example) don't count?

>> No.4304579

>>4304575

Not part of the discussion, and I'm interested.

Do you know examples of symbolist, contrary to plot/story comics?

>> No.4304585

>>4304215

Pictures can none the less be symbols-

>> No.4304590

Does this thread need to be made every week?

>> No.4304646

The more pertinent question is whether literature is a form of comics. Which it is.

Visual arts and writing exist on a continuum rather than as discreet categories. People have been communicating narratives using sequential pictographic images for tens of thousands of years. Comics are a much older medium than writing, and all known writing systems developed directly from comics, with the one exception being quipus. Logographic writing systems are even closer to comics than phonetic systems, but the only difference is is the type of abstraction. All the letters we still use in English today are just simple cartoons arranged in sequence.

The letter A is a drawing of an ox's head.

The letter B is a drawing of a house.

The letter C is a drawing of a sling.

The letter D is a drawing of a door.

The letter E is a drawing of a guy praying.

Put them together and you're still communicating information using a series of pictures. The best way to look at it is that literature is just a highly formalized, abstracted, and standardized way of drawing comics, and that they're both just an extension of language.

So yes, comics are literature, and literature is comics. You can draw the diving line wherever you want, but it's arbitrary.

>> No.4304677

No, they should be studied and respected as their own medium. Comics stoytelling is something specific to comics and should be respected as such. I say this as someone who's easily read more comics that literary works in his lifetime. If I had to choose between all the comics I've read and all the works of prose and poetry I've read I'd choose the former in a heartbeat.

Eisner's best works are more enjoyable than Moore's and were more revolutionary for their time.

>> No.4304683

>>4304566
>has enough of a divergent of culture
Culture should have no holdings on a definition.

>> No.4304844

>>4304677
yes. i was going to suggest Eisner. Actual storytelling instead of dudes in tights.

>> No.4304857

>>4304646
>The letter A is a drawing of an ox's head.
No it isn't, you asshat. It originated from a drawing of an ox's head 6000 years ago, but it clearly isn't a drawing of anything. It's simply three lines arranged in a triangular arrangement.

>> No.4304858

>>4304844
Read From Hell if that's your impression of Moore.

>> No.4305045

>>4304858
Not the anon you're responding to. I'm >>4304677 and just want to make it clear that dudes in tights is not my impression of Moore. I'm just annoyed with every so-called expert in the field of comics only name dropping Moore as an author worthy of acclaim. Never mind that usually the artist dictates how good a comic is.

>> No.4305059

>>4303948
depends on what you mean by literature, honestly.
personally i take a sort of literal definition and include all written art under the umbrella term of "literature," so that would include the written portion of graphic novels.

>> No.4305071

Sort of. If it's about superheroes then no, it's shit-tier stuff for manchildren.

If it's about real subjects like humans and their problems, then yes, it's literature.

>> No.4305081

>>4305071
Watchmen is both.

>> No.4305089

>>4305071
Oh, so literature has to be about real subject like humans and their problems? So Lord of the Rings doesn't count as literature in your eyes?

>> No.4305096

>>4305089
But LotR is a metaphor for drug addicts and shit. It IS about real people.

>> No.4305105

>>4305096
You truly believe that all superhero books don't use metaphors?

>> No.4305138

>>4305096
And I can't think of a cape comic that doesn't transmit a message about moral subjectivism, the idea of justice or existensialism. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it isn't.

>> No.4305139

No. But that's not a slight against comics. It's a completely different story telling medium.

>> No.4305161

>>4304857
Just because you don't recognize what a drawing is supposed to be doesn't mean it isn't supposed to be anything. Deal with it.