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.
Wednesday, October 31, 2018
Wednesday, October 24, 2018
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 17, 2018
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 10, 2018
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 3, 2018
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)