As can be gathered from the slipshod updates, and my firm resistance to the idea of giving up blogging during this quasi-hiatus period, current life has reached levels beyond hectic. But I did want to weigh in on a couple of pieces of news floating through the rivulets before morphing momentarily into driftwood.
[UPDATE: Since a certain someone apparently seems to think that everything I write on my blog is about her (when I merely alluded to the "comics as literature" crowd, bandied about for several years pre-certain someones and before McCloud), and since this certain someone would like to use enigmatic argot like "certain someone" rather than get involved with an adult and civil discussion on a very interesting issue, I only wish to add that the wholesale subscription to an argument without examples, initiated only by how a particular article enrages, is balderdash. It deadens the discussion and gives ammunition to detractors. It's no better than a Green Party supporter hassling you at the Haight Street Fair without citing a single reason why. ("Because we're the Green Party, man!") What better way to nip these issues in the bud, so to speak, than an all-encompassing response that stands as sui generis? Something which takes McCloud and Ware's points and hits the ground running. This is the kind of interesting issue that literary blogs can look into. (For example, I'd love to see Mr. Green's thoughts on the matter.) Fortunately, Maud has looked at this issue from reverse, citing a Rani Dharker article that compares pomo novels with comic book technique. ]
[UPDATE 2: Also, Mr. Sarvas has interviewed Swink Editor Leelia Strogov.]
Posted by DrMabuse at June 14, 2004 12:36 AMRe: The comics issue.
I'm not enough of a scholar to really take on the issue of whether or not something is literature, but I think that both the "comics as literature" crowd and the literary crowd could use a good shake. Heck, I'm all for a little good-natured shaking in general, really.
I think that the label "literature" has taken a hell of a lot of abuse over the years, so the desire to draw a line makes sense. But I worry that taking stands against popular art-forms will only reinforce certain stereotypes that people have about literature, since so much of the criticism of comics that attempt to taken seriously seems so damn spiteful and down-the-nose. (I'm not talking about your comments, which I thought were probably the most evenhanded I've seen on the issue.)
On the other hand, by trying to claim a place under the literary banner, comics run the risk of taking on the nauseating pretentiousness often seen in literary circles.
While I lack the critical skills to write anything convincing, I really think that Maus, by Art Spiegelman, even if it's not actually literature, comes pretty damn close. (To read a little bit about the book, click here http://store.rabbitvalley.org/item_1777_2529.html .)
Posted by: rasputin at June 14, 2004 12:35 PMSeems to me that you react to that certain someone a lot more than she reacts to your arrogant ass.
Posted by: Mr. Lincoln at June 14, 2004 10:14 PMHonest Abe: Ever hear of a concept called playful? Furthermore, do you have the cojones to offer a real name? I suspect nay on both counts.
Posted by: Ed at June 14, 2004 11:56 PM