NYT Magazine: Are Comics The New Mainstream Novels?

securitas writes "The New York Times Magazine cover story this week is a (typically) long feature about the rise of comic books and graphic novels into mainstream culture, with writer Charles McGrath (former editor of the Book Review) stating: 'Comic books are what novels used to be -- an accessible, vernacular form with mass appeal ... perfectly suited to our dumbed-down culture and collective attention deficit.' McGrath cites the mid-1980s birth of a movement that began and fizzled with Maus (Art Spiegelman), Love & Rockets (Hernandez Bros.) Watchmen (Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons) and Batman: The Dark Knight Returns (Frank Miller). The current renaissance in graphic novels include non-fiction Palestine (Sacco), non-fiction Persepolis (Satrapi) which has sold 450,000 copies, Ghost World (Clowes), American Splendor (Pekar), Road to Perdition (Collins) and Chris Ware's Jimmy Corrigan: The Smartest Kid on Earth, which won the 2001 Guardian Prize for best first book and has sold 100,000 in hardcover. McGrath interviews Marjane Satrapi, Julie Doucet, Joe Sacco, Art Spiegelman, and Alan Moore, among others. The article also has a multimedia interactive feature with many of the graphic novelists (registration required) in the magazine article."

Comments

Manga?

[CommanderData]

The author of the article barely makes mention of it except to crack a joke. Manga has been mainstream entertainment for people of all ages/social status for years in Japan, and accounts for about 1/3 of all books and magazines published there (and several billion US dollars in sales). Where 'Comic Books' are considered Geeky in the US, Manga is read by everyone from children to housewives to businessmen.

It's about time we started catching up...

Re:Manga?

[John_Booty]

Yeah, but they're also run off on cheap newsprint there in black and white so the cost is very low. Graphic novels in the USA are slick glossies using fancy color techniques and cost as much as a nice hardcover. These two things are apples and durien for comparison.

Have you ever considered that the higher production values of American comics is what's holding them back from becoming the "Everyman's" novel in America? The high production quality, slick graphics, and glossy paper of American comics translate to a higher price tag and make American comics more suitable as collectors' objects, as opposed to the equivalent of a novel that you don't mind tossing into your bag and reading on the train or at the beach. That's why Japanese comics are sold at newstands everywhere in Japan, and American comics are mostly found at specialty shops these days.

Re:Manga?

[Kenrod]

I was reading Tintin at 6 years old, and I recall comprehending it quite well at that age. The stories work as simple adventure, but there's a lot of stuff for adults in there as well. Like the Shrek movies, it appeals to children while offering up cultural references for adults. I also now know some of the storylines involve heroin smuggling, murder, and terrorism (although the English translations I read had been cleaned up). Herge (sorry, US keyboard) is also an excellent illustrator. It's a bit unfair to label Tintin as racist - politically correct intolerance for racism is a recent phenomenom. We're talking about pre-WWII European culture here. Just about everything created by that culture was racist (as it was in most of the world).

Re:Manga?

[macshit]

The issue is character development, plots and artwork.

Sure.

I've yet to see a manga with artwork superior to the best of the US artists. That's a given.

No. That's your personal opinion, one which in my experience is not shared by most people (who are involved in comics).

Suggesting that the characters in a one-shot or two-shot manga can compare to the history of Wolverine, for instance, is a joke. The only character I can think of in manga that might be equivalent is Lone Wolf and Cub.

There are many long-lived manga series. I don't know in years, but a typical one is probably oh, around 25 volumes of "tankoubon" (each typically about 200 pages); that's not as long as, say, the history of superman, but often such series will have a much more coherent approach, because it's done by a single author, and -- sometimes :-) -- with a grand plan for how the series will develop.

Actually, thematically unified manga "novels" seem typically to be in the range of around 20 tankouban, whereas I think the really long running series (> 40 tankouban, like 8000 pages or more!) are a bit more like U.S. series, with an episodic nature (but while writer/artist changes occur, the seem to be much more rare than in U.S. comics).

U.S. superhero comics often have long histories, but it doesn't necessarily follow that they are somehow "deep" or "well-developed" -- most of the history of these comics is rather shallow puttering about, with the occasional explosion of development (such as the Dark Knight stuff, and what occurred in its wake).

It's a bit hard to argue on the details, because it's clear that you are much more knowledgable about U.S. superhero comics than I am -- and it's also clear that your knowledge of manga is pretty limited (again, I am no expert, but it's obvious even to me).

So, let's just drop the absolute declarations like "U.S. artwork is inarguably better", since they are obviously not only subjective, but in this case being made without extensive knowledge of both bodies of work.

Ok?

Adams

[mfh]

> Are Comics The New Mainstream Novels?

This may be true, although I have a slightly different perspective. I think we just really like the people who make comics, because they are expressive people; these same people could do anything else and we would like it just as much. For example, take Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert. I have been holding out for the next Scott Adams novel (not comic, read: handbook). I was greatly amused, and felt better protected against the weasels in society, after reading "The Way of the Weasel." This was a fantastic read, filled with cynical, yet practical knowledge, to help combat the weasels ruining our workplaces and our private lives. Sure Dilbert comics make an appearances in TWotW, to illustrate concise points, but they only accent the rest of the book and support points raised with classic Dilbert humour. His writing is stunning -- and wholly useful. I can only hope he writes another one of these because I found it totally useful, as I'm sure many of you have.

Good Old New York Times

[SQL Error]

perfectly suited to our dumbed-down culture and collective attention deficit

Yep, good old New York Times, never missing a chance to sneer at popular culture.

After all, if people actually like it, it can't possibly be good.

Re:Good Old New York Times

[Otter]

Also, regarding the notion of a poetry->novels->manga devolution:

1) My impression is that the growth of novels was driven by the availability of affordable mass printing, rather than an inability of readers to handle poetry.

2) The ongoing disappearance of poetry is mostly a consequence of poets' writing for each other rather for an audience. The readers haven't gotten dumber; the poems have become inaccessible and ugly.

That said, graphic novels are still dweeb candy. ;-)

Re:Good Old New York Times

[ScottGant]

The poets of today write in a different form than they did in the past centuries. They write them as song lyrics!

Look at Dylan. He is more a poet than a singer...as he can hardly carry a tune, but so what? His words are powerful! These are simple tunes with simple chord changes with simple melodies yet very complex and beautiful words and ideas.

Dumbed-down

[alnya]

Perfectly suited to our dumbed-down culture and collective attention deficit...

I think that's a bit harsh for novels and graphic novels. Some of the comics cited above are difficult, intelligent stories with involved character development and a good story to tell.
Calling that dumbed-down undersells the artists and the readership.

I'm pretty sure someone was saying that about Dickens in his day.

Re:Dumbed-down

[paulydavis]

Well for some acedemics, real lit is supposed to be unreadable dribble that post-moderniss and the modernists before them put out. If all modern novels were of the ilk that some in the acedemy read and consider highbrow I would read more comics for sure.

"dumbed down"

[lovecult]

I'm sure many of we lovers of the medium of comics will object to the "dumbed-down" comment"

Comic reading implies a different kind of literacy.
Not an illiteracy.

We know many people who don't read comics because, as they say, "we don't get it".

I pity the comic-illiterate, for the unique joy that they lose out on.
And I question the implication that comics are "dumb".
Many literary works of great sophistication, not to mention beauty, happen to be comics.

Re:"dumbed down"

[May Kasahara]

Maybe someone should whap the author upside the head with copies of Comics and Sequential Art and Understanding Comics (I know he mentioned the latter in the article, but if the misspelling of Scott McCloud's name is any indication, I have to ask myself if he's really read it).

Comic Book the Movie

[millahtime]

I just saw "Comic Book the Movie" staring and directed my Mark Hammil. I do believe that this movie does show many of the reasons why it does not hit major mainstream. I love comics but some of the people who are all about comics just plain creep me out. There is that stigma and it scares many self proclaimed (and they want to be that way) "normal" people away.

Yes, I do realize those guys are prolly mods on /. so let the flamebait mods begin.

I'll go ahead and say it...Sandman?

[johnthorensen]

How can you have a post on graphic novels without including Neil Gaiman's "Sandman" series? ;)

Seriously, this is some of the most amazing stuff ever to come out, both with respect to storyline and art. Gaiman is a master wordsmith and weaves elements of ancient religion, existential philosophy, and wry british humor into his works. More here, here, and at Gaiman's Blog.

Seriously, check it out. This stuff is awesome :)

-JT

Re:I'll go ahead and say it...Sandman?

[brandonY]

Indeed, I was surprised too. Gaiman's work is quite possibly the ultimate example of comic book as novel. Maybe they figure it's not "accessible to the masses" on account of how smart it is?

The Smartest Kid On Earth

[slimyrubber]

The one I enjoy is a bit different from the dumb spandex wearing underwear fetish superhero comics, but conceptually more challenging fare. one real masterpiece of the comics medium I have seen in recent times is The Smartest Kid On Earth. It's an almost oppressively bleak look at the commonplace estrangements that make up much of modern life. There is a leavening of black humour however, and the outstanding art is a delight in itself.

Mucho recommended

One flaw...

[tverbeek]

The only thing wrong with this theory is one tiny factoid: hardly anybody reads comic books. Their main retail outlet (comics specialty stores) are visited mostly by die-hard fans of the superhero monthlies, and graphic novels are just starting to get some shelf space in bookstores... most of which is dedicated to translations of Japanese manga series, not the books cited by the submitter (many of which have shifted only tens of thousands of copies nationwide).

Don't get me wrong: I'm a lifelong fan and reader of the medium, I've done a little on the creative end of it as well, and continue to do so as an avocation. But it is not (yet) a phenomenon of mainstream media.

Cherry on top

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

I just wonder are comics part of the growing trend within drama and literature to 'spice up' the story, by adding in shall we say supernatural elements.

For instance many new shows star vampires, dead people, are set in space or have oodles of compuers and special effects lathered all over them. Which isn't to say that some aren't good. Similarly, there arn't a lot of comics just about regular joe bloggs action. Much more likley to find mutants or flying superheroes than cops and robbers. Dick Tracey was phased out for superman, MacGuyver for Star Trek.

Personally I think people prefer to have the added spice of exotic setting or characters. It's OK, but I think a lot of modern pop culture is being sold on the cherry topping alone by exec types catering to the L.C.D. Which isn't to say good stuff isn't there. It's just that old signal to noise ratio falling again.
It still enjoy a good old fashioned detective story, complete with mudane setting and plot. I just gets more riveting!

Re:Cherry on top

[SABME]

Not sure that adding elements of the supernatural is exactly a new trend in drama and literature ... I'm thinking of the gods and goddesses in the Illiad, Dante's trip through the afterlife in The Divine Comedy, the ghost of Hamlet's dad in Hamlet, the witches in Macbeth, the various supernatural entities in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner by Coleridge, etc.

Supernatural elements have always been popular and are present in every literary period. Something about human nature, I suppose, makes us fascinated with the possibility that we might experience the transcendent.

Literary Snobbery

[fostware]

I find graphic novels paint a mood in an instant without resorting to pages of descriptive text. In an fleeting moment, you can sum up the scene perfectly. Try doing that in a full page of text.

There is also the fact that the graphic novels are usually serialised, thus keeping the interest from one issue to the next - not a constant build-up and single climax as with most "modern fiction".

It also seems easier to spot reused plots in graphic novels :P

Re:Literary Snobbery

[rokzy]

>Try doing that in a full page of text.

great writers can. so what you're saying is that authors of graphic novels can be crap and still get their point across. woohoo....

also, often what makes something more powerful isn't what the author says, but what they don't say - what is left to the immagination, the blanks the reader fills in with personal details which leads to a kind of bond.

Re:Literary Snobbery

[TwistedSquare]

great writers can. so what you're saying is that authors of graphic novels can be crap and still get their point across. woohoo....

I think you're twisting the words of your parent post here. Graphic novels are capable of things that literature is not and vice versa, regardless of the writer's ability. For example if you want to describe a scene of carnage and chaos with huge amounts of things happening, books can try and describe it but imho it will never match the impact of a 2-page-spread scene in a comic. Likewise comics can capture expressions and meaningful moments of silence better than books (as can films). But books can be more descriptive, can use language better, can switch tact and time-frame a lot better and probably loads more things I can't think of right now. Every medium has its strengths and its weaknesses, good authors/creators know how best to exploit them.

No

[Anita Coney]

Comics will never become novels any more than a bicycle will become an airplane.

What's happening is that comics are becoming more popular while novels are declining in popularity.

Blame Hollywood

[ClubStew]

Is it that comics are growing in popularity for our "dumbed-down culture", or that Hollywood - having run out of new ideas long ago - has renewed interested in comics because they're remaking so many comics - both new and old - into movies?

Visual media is not DUMBed down

[Sethseekstruth]

Why do all the old line types insist on trying to make any media that is more visual typcast as being less intellegent. Every mass media goes thru a few stages in it's evolution. 1-"Golden age"-Only the elite have access to it, so it is focused towards the interests of the elite. 2-"Silver age"-Less lofty in content, but popularity grows rapidly, usually this is when people say it will "revolutionize the way people communicate" 3-The "Porn age"-least lofty content as the money guys come in and the lowest common denominator is applead to 4-The "ho-hum" age-the media becomes an acepted part of everyday life and overlooked. Print, radio (one with am, once with fm)the internet, and each iteration of the media (like, print went through it with paperbacks, then again with desk top publishing, the internet went thru it with the first net, then with wireless) it haapens again and again, now it's comics turn. Tv went thru this twice, once with broadcast, once with cable, then a minor progression with satlletit, and again with digiatal cable.

Am I the only one to believe this?

[xutopia]

"perfectly suited to our dumbed-down culture and collective attention deficit."

Sadly I find our culture is all about working too much and not having enough free time to have a real culture. No wonder we have an attention deficit, we can't even sit down and have fun that the week end is already long gone.

Not dumb!

[zijus]

...perfectly suited to our dumbed-down culture and collective attention deficit...

Well... It all really depends on where you are reading comics. Am leaving in Ireland now. And here, it's impossible to get people to realize that comics is not just for kids, silly simple minded stuff. To be honest I failed systematicaly in trying to explain that. I am actually from France. In that place the main stream of comic sale is targeted to adults. Not always light easy-goi'n stuff, meaningless, efortless.

I strongly disagry with this idea it's necessarily easy. One example only. Read the Meta-Baron caste by Jorodovski and Jimenez. Read especially the out-of-serie issue of this saga. You will notice that comic scenario can be quite complex, deeply rooted into theories (psycho-analysis, social...). The drawings are nothiong fare from art. Read about the way Jimenez things about front pages as paintings before starting. The inspiration he got from samurai times, mixed with soap-opera style... I discovered in amsterdam he draws the nun after Brugel. I think it's quite interesting.

No. Sorry, no, comics can be rather demanding in understanding. About previous example, I'd say you probably need a 3 reads before you kind a get an overall picture. And this is just one example. Right now I think about others comics dealing with human being identity, genetics, cloning... I can't help thinking for some BD's (comics in french), as pieces of art, with the same insight that SF can have.

A bit the same way information is turned into something ridiculous on TV, comics can be as well. It's just up to us no to make crap out'a good things. Likely as well, if you'r brain-dead with not an inch of background stuff, you won't even see the richness, the references...

I don't know why in france, comics are considered as adult material as valid as any other books can be.

Maybe the article author is dumbed-down? Or else he's making a paper on sales, which is pretty irrelevent to what comics are.

Ciao ciao.

Cause or effect?

[The_REAL_DZA]

Is it that comics and graphic novels have "risen into mainstream culture" or is it more that the traditional fans of comics and graphic novels are "coming into their own" as a powerful force in our society?

I, for one, hope it's the latter (I've always enjoyed what my dad used to call "them funny books", but I never considered myself a part of the "mainstream" of society...of course, we geeks have been gaining in popularity of late...); it might mean the difference between being "ahead of our time" and it finally being "our time"!

(also: I, for one, welcome our new graphic-novel-reading overlords. Sorry, I just couldn't resist!)

What a maroon......

[katorga]

"Comic books are what novels used to be -- an accessible, vernacular form with mass appeal ..."

I never realized that "accessable" and "vernacular" defined a novel. Amazing. As far as I can tell, oral stories, pictograms, comics, graphic novels, novels, poems, and other forms of storytelling have been around since the dawn of time.

It's marketing.

[ArsSineArtificio]

But in the more mature comics you get these really deep plot-lines that small children probably wouldn't get next to advertisements that target 8 year olds. Yet another case of the popular conception of the world being wrong. Mainly the American conception being wrong.

This isn't a failure of "the American conception" of anything, it's a failure of Marvel Entertainment's marketing department. It's their job to explain to potential advertisers the target market for their product, and to solicit advertisements to which the readers of that comic are likely to respond. Either Marvel's marketing is screwing up and soliciting "8-year-olds" ads for comic books with a mature audience, or your perceptions that these plot lines are written for someone older than eight are inaccurate. It doesn't have anything to do with some sort of failure on the part of the American public.

Literary bias

[f00zbll]

It sounds like the author of the article has a academic/literary bias against comic books. Although some comics are dumb and stupid, many of the most celebrate comics have writing that is more poetic and of higher quality than traditional non-graphic fiction. If I compare the best comics to the grocery store paperback romance novels, comics blow then away. For a long time, literary critics and academia have taken the attitude that comics books are "not serious literature."

It is about time people like Bendis and Stan Lee get credit for creating the wonderful works. If I compare comics to the numerous trash magazines, I'll take a good comic any day.

"Maus" and "Dumbed-Down?"

[BTWR]

To use "Dumbed-Down" and "Maus" in the same breath is to show both complete ignorance and stupidity.

Maus (which won the PULITZER prize) is one of the most powerful books EVER written about history's worst crime, The Holocaust.

Just because it's a "comic-book" does not mean it is "dumbed-down" or any less than a novel. Is "The Godfather," "Gone with the Wind," "Lord of the Rings" or "Shrek" any less of an art form because it is in motion picture form as opposed to the written word?

Maus is amazing. My dad got it for me in 7th grade and I have re-read it more than any other book is history.

Has film replaced painting?

[arpy]

I think while it's true that reading books may have declined, it's a testament to the medium's durability that it has already survived movies, TV, the VCR and DVDs.

More importantly, however, I think that the internet has ensured that the written word (albeit S0mT!meZ badly written) will survive although maybe books as a medium will suffer despite this. I actually think this combination of factors (survival of books, resurgence of the importance of text for communication thanks to the internet) means that it's unlikely animation will ever completely replace static comics. (Has film replaced painting?)

More likely the revolution will be in the distribution and production of comics, while their form will still hold appeal for many. Anyway, just my thoughts.

Re:In a word...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you've hit the nail on the head with the cost issue. I've been collecting comics for about the last 12 years and in that time I've seen the average cost of an issue go from about $1 to closer to $3. A 200% cost increase in a little over $12 years is huge considering that the average price increase due to inflation was only about 50%. Now when a parent has a choice of what to buy their kids, they can spend $50 to get some comics that will be read in a few hours and then discarded, or they can spend the same amount of money on a console game or several packs of Yugioh cards that will keep the rugrats occupied for hours upon hours. It's a no-brainer from the parents' point of view.