I think this comic exemplifies some concepts in McClouds book, Understanding Comics, The Invisible Art. This comic is the direct opposite of what McCloud describes as the typical notion of a comics usually are. He states that he thought comics were "usually crude, poorly-drawn, semiliterate, cheap disposable, kiddie fare (3). This comic is very simply drawn with few words that tells a story. The sequence of pictures within this comic build upon the previous allowing the reader to in a sense "read" the comic.
Another way in which I relate the concepts in McCloud's book to this comic is the simplicity of the drawings. As McCloud writes in the book, "there's something more at work in our minds when we view a cartoon-especially of a human face which warrants further investigation (31). The comic itself did not specify what age the man was in the comic nor his gender in fact. Because of the nature of the simple drawing I was able to apply my own thoughts and interpretations of the comic and not be told how to interpret the comic because of the drawings. The dog itself did not have any distinguishing features to warrant the type or gender of the dog. This, I think, is the art of interpreting comics.
No comments:
Post a Comment