The Future of Comics

The final blog is about the future of comics, web comics and motion comics.  For this week, I read "Stand Still, Stay Silent" for the web comic. 

So Stand Still, Stay Silent is a post apocalyptic story about a boy in the Icelandic countries (Norway, Iceland, Sweden, etc..) and the "rash illness" that's spreading across the country and the government involvement.  The first thing I noticed about this web comic is the art style and panel layout. The artwork is actually really beautifully done, and the color tones match the atmosphere of the story (Warm oranges, toned down grays and blues) and the emotion of the story and characters.  The panels are inconsistent in their layout (which is a good thing), some pages have panels that overlap each other (same with speech bubbles), while other pages are full blown images that give a sense of intensity and emotion, along with informational.  The story, although I didn't care too much for it, was actually well thought out and written.  It has elements of personal story and a sense of government involvement, which ties the story together and makes you really believe that this is a living, breathing world. 

So I guess the big question is "What is the future for comics?", and to that, I think it's a mixed answer.  Do I think comics are going to go completely digital? And to that, I say no, because when comics become digital, they lose a certain credibility.  With most books now a days, digital isn't such a bad thing, because everyone has smart phones or tablets to allow for easy transport.  Although comics are the same way, there's a big element that makes comics unique, and that's because they're collectables.  People have been collecting comics since they were released, and it's not because they hope they're going to increase in value and then just sell them, it's because most people grew up with comics, they share an emotional bond with comics.  First editions, foiled covers, mint condition, there's a ton of reasons why people collect comics, and because of that, I don't think comics will ever stop being printed. 

With that being said, I don't think web comics, or digital comics is a terrible idea either.  We've learned in this class that it can take days, weeks or even months just to knock out just a few pages of a comic or a graphic novel, and I think that has a huge role to play in human error.  For example, if I'm drawing on paper, there's a chance I could mess up a line, spill something on the paper or even lose it.  But with digital art, you can "undo" mistakes, which takes out the human error and save time, thus making it easier and quicker to knock out pages.  Another reason why it's a good idea, stems from what I said earlier about books; they're easily transported.  My wife and I take a lot of cruises, so for her, she downloads a lot of books on her iPad, so that when we're laying in bed and relaxing before bed, or even by the pool, she can take all her books with her on a small device.  Well the same concept applies, allowing to download a collection of comic books on a device allows people to read it no matter where they are without holding a physical copy.  And that's kind of where all paper materials are going, it's mostly going digital because we're getting to a point in our lives that saving trees is more important than ever. 

So to conclude, I don't think comics are in a state now that they were in the late 80's to late 90's, where comic books were a big deal (at least they were for me when I was a kid) to kids as they use to be, but I also don't think they're going anywhere anytime soon.  The late Stan Lee, along with comic books were a huge influence for me as a young artist, and even though I didn't major in Illustration (I went for Graphic Design), it doesn't mean I stopped drawing, and never will.

Batman The Killing Joke

Question One:  I'm a little creeped out and a little intrigued by the text.  This isn't a normal Batman comic where the villain does something wrong and Batman goes to "save the day".  It's almost as if Batman has been tired of his "routine" (fighting crime with Joker) and wants to call a truce so to speak.  Joker seems to have gone off the deep end mentally and starts doing things that are not characteristic of his behavior (ie. Robbing banks, taking over a industry, etc...), he instead tortures a man by trying to make him go mad and shoots his daughter in the spine to cripple her.  

The ending was by far the weirdest part showing that Batman is only human, being taken down by a single bullet and ending the legacy, all from a nobody, just an ordinary guy.  He then talks about how he'd get married, settle down with a wife and go to heaven.  It's like the birthing of a villain, showing how easy it would be to take down a man in a suit.  Batman isn't invincible, he's a human man in a suit with no powers, and uses gadgets and inventions to help him fight crime.

Question Two:  I can connect to both Batman and Joker in this comic.  For Batman, he's stuck in a routine; Save the day by defeating the villain, locking the villain up, villain escapes, repeat.  Batman is looking for a way out of the endless cycle by coming to his senses and trying to break the loop by doing something different.  Batman isn't some off world superhuman being, his parents were killed by muggers, he inherited a fortune, but instead of seeking revenge, he used his own personal experience to help others. 

As for the Joker, there was a lot of backstory told in this comic that shows how and why the Joker became the way he is.  Sometimes it's a series of decisions or just life events that change who we are and test the character of ourselves.  For the Joker, it took a turn for the worse and because of that, he became a villain.  Some people can find rhyme and reason with doing bad things, others do not, and I think it's a test of who people are, the severity of the situations and how we react to these situations that show who we really are. I wasn't the same person I was years ago, no one is, and that's because situations and happenings change who we are as people, it's how we evolve. 

In the end, I have sympathy for both of them.  Both Batman and Joker were hit with hard times in their younger years, but the test of each of their character is what sets them apart.  Batman chose to help others while Joker's mental state vanished and he became mad.  

Question Three:   If I had to take this story into another medium, I would make it into a live action movie.  No animation, no cartoons, just purely cinematic.  

If I had to change anything about this to fit the live action movie, I would dive deeper into the psychotic of the Joker and how it came to be.  Reading the comic, I wanted to get more into the Joker's head.  I feel like if I did the movie, I would based it more around the Joker and his insanity than with Batman and his guilt of possibly killing the Joker.  Really get into the backstory of both characters to draw in the emotions from the characters to the audience to show that decisions made throughout your life shapes who we are today.

I also feel the live action movie would be the best format for this story because (although possible), it's hard to really get into emotions and a persons thoughts through animation, I feel as if using human beings to portray the level of craziness (I found that Heath Ledger played an excellent Joker), and sympathy is something that a lot more people can connect to on a personal level.   

I would also tie in the epilogue directly into the movie (the birth of a villain killing Batman), only for the sole purpose of just showing how fragile humans are.  When I think of a super hero, I think of unnatural powers, and almost a state of invincibility, and showing Batman die at the end just goes to show that at a blink of an eye, the once great legacy of Batman could all be ended with a small bullet.

Reconsidering the Superhero

For this week, I read Black Panther.  I know earlier this year the movie released, which I didn't see, but I knew about Black Panther from my teenage years, but never paid it any mind because it didn't seem like a Superhero or world I wanted to be apart of.  I now see what the hype is all about.

First thing that grabbed my attention was the story. Black Panther is the king of his people and has to deal with villains.  The thing for me that separates Black Panther from other super heroes is the fact that Black Panther is a king, which means it adds to the story about having to rule as a king and fight evil, whereas most super hero comics are about the heroes fighting the villains and nothing more.  It adds a complex level of struggle as the hero to fight and rule.

Art direction is the next subject.  The only thing that really confuses me about Black Panther (and maybe it was explained in earlier issues), is that they dress and fight like a tribe, but they have advanced technology to use. A lot of the panels are in large scale whereas most comics use smaller panels on each page.  More other than not, I found myself zooming out to look at a bigger panel, which is a good thing in my opinion because a single large panels can give emphasis on a subject matter or even tell more of a story than more smaller panels.  Another thing I noticed is the constant use of emotion in the characters faces, which helps drive the story being told. 

I can't say Black Panther is my new favorite comic book hero, but it has peeked my interest in learning more about it.  The movie also got decent reviews and I've heard it's good, so maybe I'll check it out sometime.

Women

This week I read "This One Summer" by the Tamaki cousins.  It's a graphic novel that narrates the life of Rose and her family's annual trip to a cottage for vacation. 

The first thing I noticed in This One Summer was the artwork.  In most of the graphic novels I've read in this class up until this point, the art style has been, kinda rough.  Not that it was drawn poorly, but the art is usually clean, bold lines and sometimes colored.  With This One Summer, the artwork is soft, and the line work looks like it was done with a paint brush which adds a delicate touch to the art.  I also think the choice of not using color was a smart choice, because towards the middle of the graphic novel, I found out that her mom is suffering from depression due to a miscarriage she had awhile back, and the solid black used with the monotone grays really shows the emotion of depression.

Another big thing I noticed was the story.  I'm not quite sure if this is fiction or non-fiction, because of how well the story is told.  Everything about the story is believable, there are no super heroes, no monsters or worldly creatures, just a story about a girl and her family on vacation.  The story starts off as just a normal girl on vacation with her parents, but then Rose meets the store clerk, starts to develop a crush on him, then finds out the girl he's been hanging out with is pregnant, and so on. 

The last thing I noticed was the characters in the novel.  Each character has his or her own personality.  Rose is the typical teenage girl, developing a crush on a older boy, rebelling against her parents.  Rose's friend's mom is a sort of hippie, all natural, spiritual.  Rose's dad is by far my favorite character, he's down to earth, kind of the "cool" dad (One thing I absolutely loved about his character was the fact that he mentioned Neil Peart, which is the drummer for Rush, which is my favorite band).  It's one thing to have a really driving story, which I believe was executed beautifully, but when you add in characters with their own unique personalities, it becomes a work of art. 

I was a little skeptical of how this novel was going to be, but truth be told, by the end of it, I wanted to find out more.  Did Jenny have the baby? How is Rose's mom dealing with the depression? Do they go back to the cottage next year, and if so, is her friend still going to be there?  I think that's what sets apart good novels and masterpieces, the constant desire to find out more about the story and characters after the final page.

Contemporary Literature

So this week I ended up reading Eightball by Daniel Clowes.  Eightball is a series of contemporary literature comics wrapped up into one book. 

It's hard to start about what I thought about this comic.  It seems like Eightball was written awhile back, maybe in the 80's or 90's because of the content.  It almost feels like an underground comic due to the nature of the content (Sex, nudity, drugs, cussing, etc...), but with a contemporary spin.  A lot of the panels didn't make a whole lot of sense, for example, in one of the comics the main character Clay is inside an adult theater watching porno, and he briefly describes the line in the men's room being awful and that he'd never go in there.  A specific porno shows up and he's drawn to one of the characters, so a guy in the lobby tells him to go to the men's room to seek answers.  When Clay arrives to the men's room, he's greeted by what looks like a guru of some sort.  There are many scenes like this in all of the comics that don't entirely make sense, although I'm not sure if they're suppose to. 

The stories are very character driven, but also has a strong story as well.  All of the comics usually show or talk about an issue in the current world (80's-90's in this case).  For example, in one of the comics, a man gets arrested and as they're driving down to the precinct, they see a prostitute on the side of the road working, so they arrest her.  Shortly after, the two cops are arguing about which one's "turn" it is to have sex with her, and one of them actually has sex with the prostitute.

Manga

This is going to be a fun week in this class because I absolutely love anime and Japanese-style art.  For this I decided to read Ranma 1/2, because I'm familiar with the name but not manga in general because it was not something I've gotten into reading (even though I've been told it's better than watching anime).

So one of the things I noticed about Ranma 1/2 (or just Manga in general) is the culture.  Even in typical American comics, culture plays a large role in the story and feel of the comic.  In manga, they show typical Japanese architecture such as dojos, schools and hospitals. They even go as detailed as to show trees that grow in Japan such as Hinoki cypress and cherry blossom trees.  They also use almost stereo-typical animals in their story, like Ranma uses a Panda in it.

Another thing that is different in manga and American comics is the art style and forms of impressions.  The art style for most manga has a distinctive style (ie. Large eyes, small mouth, slim bodies (almost no one is fat, and if they are, its exaggerated), etc..).  Another thing is the facial and body impressions.  For example, if Ranma is angry, the facial features are overly exaggerated, same with the body language.

And the last thing I noticed is the color.  The front cover is always colored, but the rest of the manga is black and white.  I'm not exactly sure why that is, but if I had to guess, it would be because of mass print and the company doesn't want to print in color to save money.  Other than that, the only other reason I can think of is because it's tradition (Japanese culture is big on tradition).  I don't think it takes away from the story at all, if anything, it makes it more interesting to use black, white and gray to portray depth and perspective. 

I thoroughly enjoyed reading the manga this week, I can't wait to find out more about it in next class.

A Wide World of Comics

So for this week, I decided to read Moebius' work (Mostly for Heavy Metal magazine). The artist known as Moebius is actually Jean Giraud from France. It's hard to describe his art style, it's a mixture between simple and complex.

The line work is very complex with simple watercolor-like coloring.  Most comic book artists that I've seen in the past several weeks go simple in design for small panels and very detailed in larger panels, but with Moebius, his artwork is always very detailed which shows that he's a very skilled artist. 

I think the biggest thing I've taken away from Moebius and his work is his storytelling.  I've noticed a bit of a pattern in his comics.  It seems he's a huge fan of science fiction, but there are rarely any happy endings.  It usually starts with a small back story of the main character and their purpose, then introduces alien-like creatures that feel like they belong in the story.  Each comic he shows feels like it's part of a bigger story (that belongs in a graphic novel), you feel like part of the story.  But the thing with Moebius' story, is that it usually ends horribly for the main character.  For example, in "The Twinkle in Fildegar's Eye", Fildegar play's the main character that follows a crystal to travel across the galaxy.  He lands on a planet and meets inhabitants, but gets pulled by a sense of wonder, where he comes across a talking mushroom-like creature.  He ends up eating a part of the talking mushroom and the crystal leaves and then turns into a super nova.  It leaves a sense of wonder and deeper meaning. 

I've been a huge fan of Heavy Metal magazine since I was in high school, and usually the art in there is very "underground" (drug use, nudity, sex, etc...), but Moebius doesn't really fit in that category, although there was breasts in one of his comics that I read, I wouldn't categorize him as an underground artist because of the deep story telling and not needing to put drugs and sex into his comics to grab the attention of the audience, his story telling and art does that already.

Stereotypes

I think stereotypes in movies, video games, TV shows and other forms of entertainment can be a good thing and a bad thing. 

I believe it can be a good thing because it gives an exaggerated sense of character to the person playing the role to let the audience really understand.  For example, Anakin Skywalker from the newer films is a perfect example of toxic masculinity and plays a very exaggerated stereotype, but he wasn't always this way.  Anakin was feeling powerless (or not as masculine as he wanted), and because of this, became very toxic to the people around him. 

I also believe stereotypes can be a bad thing because of the way it represents men as a gender.  When movies portray men as (I'll continue with the toxic masculinity) toxic, some women may get the feeling that most men are that way.  But the same thing can be said about women in stereotypes.  Most TV shows that I've seen portrays women (mostly wives) as these "I'm always on my period and I'm a huge bitch" personality.  For example, "Everybody Loves Raymond", Raymond's wife Debra comes off as a feared woman, and quite frankly, a bitch.  And I'm sure there are many men out there that watch these shows and just think that's how all women are.

Stereotypes in general is a two edged sword.  On one end, a small use of it can drive a character's story and/or give a better understanding on their attitude and way of thinking when making decisions.  But the other edge of the sword, is adding too much stereotype to a character can come off as racist.  Some films actually push the envelope with the stereotypes to either make it completely unbelievable or make it into a comedy.  For example, Mean Girls, the film is mostly about spoiled white girls (and one African American girl), but it pushes the stereotype that white girls in a private high school are stuck up. 

I think with the way the country is going, I think we're going to see less and less stereotypes in movies, shows and video games because it seems that most people get offended too easily about things like this now a days.  In the 80's and 90's it was common (like described in Back to the Future with Biff about toxic masculinity).  I think with the right amount of stereotype, it can really push a character's story or even the story of a movie, but going too far and you're jumping into deep water.

Maus

Maus is a graphic novel written by Artie Spiegelman about his Father's experience during World War II. The story begins with Artie going to visit his father later on in life (He remarries because his mother committed suicide and he's had two heart-attacks).  After some back and forth, Artie talks to his father about sharing some of his stories so he can write the book (Maus).  The three biggest things that stuck out to me were the art, language and history.

The simple line work with shading (no color was used) fits the narrative perfectly.  The contrast between the darks and lights perfectly sets the moods in some of the panels.  For example, when Artie gets drafted into the Army, the panels become darker due to the nature of war (death, injury, agony, etc..).  Even though this is more obvious, Artie decides to draw all of the characters as animals (Civilians as mice and pigs, Nazi's as cats).  At first glance of the graphic novel, it seemed a little weird and it was hard to get past the fact that they were mice, but as I dived deeper into the story, they stopped being animals in clothes and became people with emotions with actions.  Even though the artwork is simple, Artie uses large panels with great detail in the art to show deep emotion and important information. 

The next biggest things I observed was the language.  Simple language is used with bolded important words to shows emphasis on specific meanings of words.  The language is simple and genuine, it's as if a stenographer was typing every word that he was having with his father, and his father telling the story.  Another point I noticed in the narrative is the Polish accent.  At first glance of it, it seemed like a typo in the story, but after reading onward, I could picture the thick accent telling the story.  I also love how the narrative goes from telling his father's story to Artie getting the story from his father. 

And last, the history of the entire story.  Instead of telling the textbook "World War II Nazi Germany invading" story that most people in this day and age know, Artie decides to tell the story through the eyes of his father.  The best part of it, is that even though the main premise of this book was to talk about life during the Nazi invasion, Artie decides to tell the story about his father and his life before, during and after the war.  Doing so, it drives an emotional bond between the reader and the characters; it offers a way for the reader to care about the characters before throwing the Nazi's into the story. 

Overall, I really enjoyed Maus.  Even though there wasn't much story about when Artie was a child, I feel like it started in his adulthood because of the importance of the story.  This seems like a really personal adventure and narrative that was perfectly executed by both art and story telling.

Underground Comics

So for this week, I read Robert Crumb's "Whiteman", and it was....interesting.  The narrative starts by picturing a typical white family on their way to go camping in a RV.  The father takes his kids on a hike (of course the kids are bitching the entire time), then they run off and the father tries to find them.  This is where the story takes a rather weird turn, bigfoot ends up kidnapping the father and giving him to his daughter (of course after she forces him to please her orally). 

So she grabs Whiteman and runs off to a cave where she eats roots of a tree and tries to feed Whiteman, which he can't eat.  She ends up falling asleep and one thing leads to another and Whiteman ends up fingering and having sex with her.  The rest of the story is kind of obvious, he falls in love with her, they try to go back to the city, she gets captured, he returns to his family and ultimately ends up with bigfoot in the end. 

So with this comic, I went into it thinking it was just going to be over the top filth, foul language, sex and racism, but it wasn't like that at all, unless you really try and factor in some things.  For instance, in the entire comic, it's only white people (the family, the hunters they run into in the woods, the sheriff and the authorities who end up holding the bigfoot in the cell).  Now if you factor in that the big foot is analogy for African Americans, then this simple story of a family going hiking turns into a little darker of a story.

In the overall story, the "underground" parts of it were only in small segments, and it was only sex (beastiality more or less).  The language in it uses stereo-typical phrases (kids whining about being active, wife constantly nagging, father is a hard working guy looking for an escape), the hunters are typical rednecks and the lab guy is a nerd.

Body Talk

Both Eisner and Thompson tell amazing stories in their books, and even though there are some differences, there are also some similarities. 

Is Eisner's work "A Contract with God", he writes four stories that are completely different from each other, but all four stories are connected in the sense that it happens in the same building, during the same time.  Eisner's work I believe is meant for a mature audience and wasn't intended for children or even younger adults because of the message he portrays through his writing.  For example, in his third story ("The Super"), there's mention of pedophilia and suicide in it, and doesn't really set the tone that much younger audiences could get into or understand with an open mind.  Eisner also focuses on the message of religion pretty heavily which makes me believe that Eisner was a religious man and wanted to portray that through his work. 

Thompson's work "Blankets" on the other hand seems like a very personal comic about his life.  As for the target audience, it seems like it's aimed towards young adults that may have experienced the same things he went through (such as myself, which I'll explain later).  This story is a personal narrative of Thompson's life through the comic strip, and uses dialog and experiences to connect to the audience. 

What really related to me was Thompson's "Blankets" story, at least in the beginning.  Some parts of it were disconnected from my life (like being freezing cold in the winter, mom being very religious, and the father figure in genera), but a lot of it actually sunk in with me on a personal level.  Growing up, I was the older brother (my brother being two years younger), and I felt it was my obligation to take care of him since we didn't have a dad in the picture.  I was also bullied pretty hard, but we lived in a bigger city, so the insults and bullying wasn't directly tied to my personal life, but towards my physical appearance and ratty clothes due to us being poor.  There were points in my life that I was always annoyed with what he did, and we always fought, which most of the time ended up in physical fist fights, but at the end of the day, he was my brother and I would have done anything to protect him.

The Comic Book

So I looked over the #1 issue of Batman (1940) and then looked at #600 (2002) for a comparison of how the comic book shaped in a 60 year time.  Bob Kane was the artist of the original Batman, and for its time, is actually quite impressive.  It's hard to look at a comic book from our day and age and try to appreciate the art style of something from the late 1930's going into the 1940's, but it's actually quite amazing.  The grid layout from the original comics is kind of standard, but this way because no one knew how to break the limitations of the grid to really explore the page.  The colors are very flat with no shading, but where there is no shading in color, the use of black fills that void.  The contrast of dark black and bright colors mixes well and gives a great sense character and feeling.  Issue #600 on the other hand stays away from bright colors, in fact, the majority of the comic uses very dark colors and blacks to portray the feeling, which makes sense because the tone of Batman is very dark (parents murdered, seeking revenge, stopping crime, etc..).  The exploration of the grid is very nicely done.  Overlapping panels, full page illustrations with decorated borders and backgrounds really shows how far comic books not just from an artistic point of view, but from a layout.

The next one I looked at was the The Adventures of TinTin.  The first thing I noticed was the art style, which for 1956 is very well drawn.  It kind of reminds me of the old Batman show where every sound effect is spelled out.  For example, when TinTin breaks an object, instead of just visually showing it, the artist shows it in words too, like *Crash* or *Ding*.  The grid structure is laid out in a very traditional way, where everything sits comfortably inside each of the panels.  The writing tells a great story, but it also has a light humor to it.  I feel like middle-schoolers would read this as gateway into the comic book world.

The Comic Strip

Nemo Classic Comic Library was a magazine published between 1983 to 1990 that hosted an array of comic strips.  The format of these comics is very specific, with minor tweaks. 

The first thing I noticed is the format.  All of the comics I saw in 3 different issues were in a 3x4 (12 panel) with a 3 panel horizontal header format.  It's a simplistic form that really minimizes the content in each strip, but it is very consistent.  The next thing I noticed is that all of the comics, along with all of the pages, are in black and white.  The cover on the other hand were always in color.

Charles Schultz is an icon when it comes to comics, his most well known comics was Peanuts.  His earlier comics are done in black and white with very little filled black spots (which shows a lighter side to his art).  His artwork is also very simplistic, in the sense that the stroke likes are very simple and fluid, and with very little detail. The panels are also very simplistic.  None of the art ever breaks out of the panels, and they are always square or rectangular.   I think the reason why Schultz was so successful in the making of Peanuts was the simplicity of everything; art style, panel layout, dialog and even the subjects in the comic (Children, snoopy, school, etc...), it becomes very relatable to most younger children, which I think was the target audience for this particular comic. 

Bill Watterson's Calvin and Hobbes is all time classic (at least to me).  Growing up, it use to be my favorite comic to read and when I got into drawing, I use to try to mimic Watterson's style.  Although Calvin and Hobbes started off black and white, it eventually went to color later down the road.  I think what really connects me to his work is the way he shows emotions (in characters, body language and dialog).  In the characters, facial expressions drive most of the humor and story telling.  For example, when Calvin takes a bite of food that he hates, the way he is animated to spit it out is very over exaggerated and it shows.  The body language is also unique in the way he shows movement in both characters and objects.  The last in the dialog, which I find to be suited for kids, but not an audience as young as Peanut's is targeted for.  With the way each story is told, along with the words used, it makes me feel as if the comic is targeted more towards middle schoolers to early high schoolers.  Even though I really appreciate the way Calvin and Hobbes becomes colorized later, I still believe the black and white version is still holds strong.  I think that the colorization of the comic gives it a bit of depth and helps paint the picture of some comics (ie.  When Calvin and Hobbes are laying in bed with the covers pulled up over half their faces and the dark purple shade is used for darkness), but with the black and white, you're almost forced to use your imagination to set the tone of the comic, almost like an unspoken word.  The last thing I noticed is the way the comic strips are laid out.  Yes, most of the panels are constructed as squares or slightly stretched squares (besides the opening panel, which is roughly 2-3 panels long), Watterson actually breaks out of the panel and almost leaves a "window open" into the world of Calvin and Hobbes.  Which when thinking about it is actually very brilliantly done because with those specific panels, you're not reading a comic strip anymore, but looking into Calvin's world and experiencing it without a square boarder restricting what the artist wanted you to see.

Understanding Comics

I'm not going to lie, when I first started reading "Understanding Comics", I was a bit bored in the beginning, but as I read on, I got sucked into the literature and couldn't stop reading and before I knew it, it was over.  I even wrote down a few pages in the book where I learned something.

I think the biggest learning I took away from this book (even though it's a very simple concept for most people who read comics) was on page 66, "The Gutter". 

Although a simple concept, I didn't realize that the gutter played such a huge role in comic books and graphic novels.  Before reading that part in the book, I thought panels were just aligned in a order in which the artist intended the viewer to read the comic, I never took in account that spacing of the panels could showcase time between frames. 

The way he describes how the gutter works is actually very clever.  It's like showing a panel with a hand with a pencil in it above a blank page, and then showing the same hand, with the same pencil with artwork on the page in the next panel.  Your mind snaps to the idea that you KNOW that person drew something on the paper without actually showing panel to panel of the art being drawn.  It's amazing how our mind fills in that blank space of the gutter to connect two completely different panels. 

Also how the gutter space can be used to show amounts of time.  Such as, if two frames were close together, it can show a short period of time elapsing (ie. Showing someone opening a can of soda, then showing them drinking it;  You know it happens within seconds of each other).  Whereas if the panels are spread further apart, it shows a more lengthy amount of time (ie.  Showing the sun in the air in one panel and then showing the sun setting on the horizon in another; our minds know that it didn't just set within seconds, but took hours). 

He talks about the "experience" to connect the dots which makes a lot of sense.  If you've personally experience something (like opening a can of soda), your mind connects the dots and you know how long it'll take between actions.  In fantasy comics, it's a little less disconnected when it comes to experience, but because we know backstories of characters and origins, we can give a educated guess (ie.  The comic book hero Flash, most people know that he's incredible fast.  So if it shows him in one panel in New York, then shows him running, and the next panel he's in China, you know it happened within a matter of seconds because of his super power). 

This was the first time I've read "Understanding Comics", but there was so much I took away from it and I'll probably re-read it again soon. 

Une Semaine de Bonte

Page 1:  It looks like a woman is performing some sort of ritual in front of the rooster balancing itself on a ball. 

Page 2: Either something went wrong with the ritual or she fell ill and the rooster sitting above her is some type of doctor trying to save her.

Page 3: She ends up dying and the two roosters on both sides of her represent good and evil (angel and demon) and they're deciding who gets her soul.

Page 4: The two roosters make a decision and decide what to do with her. 

Page 5: The rooster in the doorway just murdered the woman in the bed.

Page 6: Two humans are practicing rituals in their bedroom while a rooster spies on them through the crack in the door.

Page 7:  One of the woman is pleading with the head rooster in order to spare her life while the other woman is laughing because she knows it's not going to work.

Page 8:  Both of the women are being hunted by a rooster but the goose is acting like a guardian angel and protecting them for the time being.

The Arrival

The Arrival is a graphic novel about an immigrant trying to make money and send for his family.  There are multiple reasons why this graphic novel is very well written and strongly admired by many.

First, there are no words in this novel.  The only "written words" are symbols which I believe represent a foreign language.  Most of the symbols are shown on signs and on the license, and you can tell it's a license because of how the artist decided to lay out the paper (Image on the top left, and symbols representing name, DOB, place of residence, etc...).

The next big thing I noticed in this novel is the idea of creatures living with the citizens.  This can be interpreted in multiple ways, but for me I believe it gave a feeling of unique characteristics of a foreign city (building, monuments, etc..), and he shows that it's foreign to the main character by showing normal citizens of the city walking by the creatures without a second thought, whereas the main character and the others traveling to the city making a big deal out of it.

Another great aspect of this, is the emotion detailed by the artist.  It's relatable to a lot of people, because most people have gone to a new city, state or country, and because of that, the way the main character is shown, it gives a sense of the character guessing himself, trying to communicate with the locals and even getting a new place to live.  It also shows gigantic human-like creatures that are sucking up the residents, which makes me feel like they're a part of either a military group or some sort of police force.  Showing the characters being sucked up, the main character running, the artist portrays the feeling in the drawing of the faces, the contrast in the boxes drawn and the motion the characters are drawn.

Overall, I really enjoyed Shaun Tan's "The Arrival".  It really threw me off because it was the first time I've read a wordless graphic novel, but it's very well drawn and I got a lot out of it even though nothing is explained and it's wordless.