This is a comic, isn't it?

Merlin · Post by **Merlin** » Wed Nov 28, 2001 7:44 am

Maybe this belongs in the Zwol forum, but it feels reinventy to me, so here it is instead:

I know it was a single panel, but today's Zwol strip read like a comic to me. It was the break between the two speech panels that did it. It felt like Kate was saying "This?" and pausing to look at the reader and let them take in the scene, before saying "This isn't a comic either." That's space being used to show change through time, so that's a comic. Ain't it?

Jack Masters · Post by **Jack Masters** » Wed Nov 28, 2001 7:56 am

Hmm, good point. I'd have to agree.

gazorenzoku · Post by **gazorenzoku** » Wed Nov 28, 2001 8:51 am

i would have to agree too. there is a definite movement of time... maybe comics are sort of like alchoholism, only the user can really know if it is comics or not. or maybe not...

i had one person ask me when i was in the first stages of my surreal comic experiment, "what is it you are trying to say?" i responded with a confident, "i don't know yet." i was told then, "if you don't know what you want to say, how can it be a comic book?"

at that point i didn't really understand how to respond, and felt kind of bad inside. a few weeks later, i realized that not knowing what i wanted to say was exactly the reason why the comic could succeed. it was a search into the depths of my own pshyche, and any sort of "knowing what to do" or "having a message" would only mess up that sort of process.

of course, there are all sorts of personal likes and dislikes out there, so i don't expect everyone to like what i churn out, but i think the concept is a worthy one in general.

which brings me back to the whole question or statement or whatever posed at the begining of this topic: is the ZWOL one shot a comic? i think as far as it explores the psychological movement, as faint as it might be, from one concrete moment (where the self is thinking one thing, and in one state of being) to another momen (where the self has transitioned to another state of being). granted, in this case the change is very, very subtle, almost non existant, but a shallow sort of psychological growth in time can be percieved, the root of comics as an instrument of exploring / understanding the human condition (one common theme of some so-called "great literature")

of course, in simple terms, it is also a slide along the time line sequence a little bit as well, thus making it a comic.

after all, who said that a square constitues a comic element? if aztec paintings are comics, as scott mccloud proved, then can't elements within a single box be comics?

i think so...

by the way, "house of stairs" is really great! who are you, and what are you doing, and why are you doing such a thing? let me know what is in your head!!! visit my site if you like, too.

vince
gazorenzoku@hotmail.com

damonk13 · Post by **damonk13** » Wed Nov 28, 2001 12:16 pm

no doubt.

a comic.

Tailsteak · Post by **Tailsteak** » Wed Nov 28, 2001 1:01 pm

I think Kate feels that it is not a comic-- not because it's only one panel-- but because her life no longer tells a coherent story, and because it is not "comic" (i.e. amusing)

You know, the only reason I believe my life doesn't have readers is because it's so mundane...

Post by **Greg Stephens** » Wed Nov 28, 2001 1:03 pm

Gee, all I meant by it was that I was too tired to finish the actual comic I was working on, so I whipped up a quick drawing to post instead...

But, to step into the debate, I'd agree that it functions like a comic but according to the Orthodox McCloudian would probably be considered a cartoon. It has no past and it has no future- It's just "now". ("When?" "Just now, sir.")

And a response to Vince: I think it's probably more accurate to say that "if Aztec paintings are comics, as Scott McCloud suggests" since there are people who will debate that statement (there was a lively debate on this topic over at TCJ message boards between Scott, Eddie Campbell- with Eddie taking the contrary view- and a host of others, but it appears to have vanished in a puff of virtual smoke. Pity).

edit: No! I'm wrong! The thread is right here.
_________________
Greg

[ This Message was edited by: Greg Stephens on 2001-11-28 12:04 ]

Tim Mallos · Post by **Tim Mallos** » Wed Nov 28, 2001 7:24 pm

It's a tough call. It could be argued (in fact I've had the argument) that many single panel [Cartoons] enlist the reader to construct the past or the future panel in their minds:

The guy is standing below a large safe teetering on the window sill above him. He thinks "Man, at least nothing else can go wrong". And the reader constructs the next panel of the guy getting squashed by the safe. Two panels, only one is on paper.

People who don't get single panel cartoons often don't get them because they can't draw the other panel of the COMIC in their minds using the clues in the panel they're explicitly given.

This example doesn't do that.

Anyway, Scott would say 'no, it's not a comic'. I'd say...
I dunno.

Tim

[ This Message was edited by: Tim Mallos on 2001-11-28 18:44 ]

Randy · Post by **Randy** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 12:07 am

I think that it is possible for a single panel could be considered a comic or not a comic based on the temporal map of the image. If it shows only one event then it is not. If it shows more than one event (see the temporal map part of Understanding Comics) then it is a comic. Even though words do take time, in a single panel I do not think that words count towards the temporal map (but there could be extreme cases where there could be an exception). Let me give an example, say Kate tells Selby to pick up something from a desk and she does and tells Kate "here you go". If this where one panel where Kate says her line and then you see behind her in the scene Selby handing her whatever, that is a time perceived by the movement of your eye. If it where a frame by frame of a movie, then you would see Selby pick it up and then hand it to Kate.

Based on the above I think that today's strip is not a comic.

I hope that the above makes sense. It's Midnight my time and I've just finished another almost 16 hour workday. Also, for those who want to see the Cafe again, I am almost done with a redesign and working on a new comic for it. (The comic is not Happy herbert.)

Later,
Randy
http://www.subatomiccafe.com
http://www.randyoest.com

glych · Post by **glych** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 2:56 am

There is always that wonderful rule of the exception that proves the rule...One paneled "comics" have been considered comics for years...is it not a comic just because it's one panel? No! But then again- I consider anything with both words and pictures (or a deliberate sense of overal composition) to be a comic...maybe my opinion is a bit broader than most, but that doesn't really make me wrong, just askew in the way I view it.

I think it's a comic, it projects a sense of time and space....

-glych

Jack Masters · Post by **Jack Masters** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 7:48 am

We'd probably be better off if every time we had the urge to debate the definition of comics, we actually a drew a comic instead.

fredirc · Post by **fredirc** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 10:03 am

On 2001-11-29 06:48, Jack Masters wrote:
We'd probably be better off if every time we had the urge to debate the definition of comics, we actually a drew a comic instead.

Bruno can be found here.

Jack Masters · Post by **Jack Masters** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 2:43 pm

I meant draw a comic about something completely unrelated, as to venture away from the definition-related finagling that in the past hasn't seemed to lead anywhere usefull. (While at the same time, making a comic! An inherently worthwhile way to spend some time, I'm sure we'd all agree.)
<center>
<img src="http://castlezzt.net/diagonalredwriting/comic4greg.gif">
</center>
[Edited to center comic]
_________________
<a href="Http://CastleZZT.net/Spongy/">House of Stairs</a>

[ This Message was edited by: Jack Masters on 2001-11-29 13:49 ]

Post by **Greg Stephens** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 3:15 pm

But debate can be entertaining and intellectually stimulating- much like a good comic.

I also remembered that I drew the image in question as a sort of reponse/follow-up to the last image I posted (oh, so long ago) which you may see here:

Ceci n'est pas un comique.

Would anybody say that that example is not a comic while the current one is? Are the both comics? Are they both not? Are they separately NOT comics, but in series ARE comics?

gazorenzoku · Post by **gazorenzoku** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 7:09 pm

On 2001-11-28 12:03, Greg Stephens wrote:

And a response to Vince: I think it's probably more accurate to say that "if Aztec paintings are comics, as Scott McCloud suggests" since there are people who will debate that statement (there was a lively debate on this topic over at TCJ message boards between Scott, Eddie Campbell- with Eddie taking the contrary view- and a host of others, but it appears to have vanished in a puff of virtual smoke. Pity).

edit: No! I'm wrong! The thread is right here.
_________________
Greg

========
I just wanted to write back and say thanks for the interesting link. I am looking forward to checking it out...

=======

A lot of heavy thoughts going on about comics... I realized that I feel that the bottom line is enjoyment. I enjoy looking at pictures, especially ones with stories. For me, good paintings have some sort of story contained within. I try for that kind of thing in my own paintings, though I would never tell my teacher, "I am making a comic book for the next exhibit". But the whole process doesn't differ that much from making a comic. I look deep inside myself for the "story" that I want to tell, and then tell it with paint on a canvas (or in the case of japanese painting, which i am doing now, with paint on paper). It is really hard for me to enjoy a painting that doesn't have a story locked up inside.

In the same way, comics are just so much fun because of that story that is expressed visually.

In the end, to me it doesn't seem to matter if the thing is a comic or not. If I get a feeling of entertainment or pleasure (or epiphany or whatever you want to call it) due to some sort of story locked up inside the art, then to me it can be defined as "worth looking at". Some people may differ over the term "comic", so I choose to call it "worth looking at", which is actually even more of a charged term than comic is, so it is probably not such a great term after all...

Anyhow, personally I am satisfied if I can see some drawings or paintings that are "worth looking at". Whether other people think of them as "comics" or not won't really matter when I am on my death bed. At that time, I will look back and remember (if I can) all the art "worth looking at" that I saw and created in my life....

Does that make any sense?

vince
gazorenzoku@hotmail.com

[ This Message was edited by: Greg Stephens on 2001-11-28 12:04 ]

gazorenzoku · Post by **gazorenzoku** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 7:12 pm

I wanted to get all cool and express my thoughts in a comic like the people did above, but I am not so good at doing things like that on the fly and actually I am really late for class and I wanted to express my opinion in a short time (though it took longer than I thought and now I am really running late and have to go...)

vince

Wikkit · Post by **Wikkit** » Thu Nov 29, 2001 10:40 pm

For you "one-panel-isn't a comic"s does that make The Far Side not a comic?

I think that anything that a creator and a reader calls a comic is a comic.

I also think that it doesn't really matter...

Tailsteak · Post by **Tailsteak** » Fri Nov 30, 2001 11:11 am

Perhaps it is a comic, even divorced from the archives, because we know who Kate is.

Randy · Post by **Randy** » Fri Nov 30, 2001 12:54 pm

"We'd probably be better off if every time we had the urge to debate the definition of comics, we actually a drew a comic instead."

I agree with Jack Masters.

Post by **Greg Stephens** » Fri Nov 30, 2001 6:06 pm

OK, new thread time- Let's settle this once and for all and Define Comics.

gazorenzoku · Post by **gazorenzoku** » Sat Dec 01, 2001 1:57 am

On 2001-11-30 11:54, Randy wrote:
"We'd probably be better off if every time we had the urge to debate the definition of comics, we actually a drew a comic instead."

I agree with Jack Masters.

me too... but i am slowly becoming addicted to forum debates... help!

vince
gazorenzoku@hotmail.com

jturner · Post by **jturner** » Sat Dec 01, 2001 3:57 am

I am with Jack Masters. Theory is all nice and good, but wouldn't we all be better off drawing a comic than debating whether or not Far Side is a 'comic'?

Whenever I 'come out' to people at work and tell them I do comics, they are at a loss as to how to talk about it. The non-comic reader will say so have you done any: 'cartoons', 'animations', 'drawings', etc etc but rarely would they actually use the word comic(s).

And really I don't care! All that is really important (to the er comics cause...) is that they are thinking about comics in some way!

So overall I would say yes more drawing, less 'talking'. As he posts to the message board...

jason turner
<A HREF="http://www.strongmanpress.com" TARGET="_blank">www.strongmanpress.com</A>

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Dec 01, 2001 5:03 am

On 2001-12-01 02:57, jturner wrote:
Whenever I 'come out' to people at work and tell them I do comics, they are at a loss as to how to talk about it. The non-comic reader will say so have you done any: 'cartoons', 'animations', 'drawings', etc etc but rarely would they actually use the word comic(s).

jason turner

whenever i was in highschool and people would see me drawing comics, they would always come up and ask me if i would draw them a truck with a model posing on it...

now when i tell people that i draw comics, they usually just nod and give me an empty look... so i usually just tell people that i am a truck driver or a politician.