| |
|
Good work. Like it a lot.
The point you make about Moore reminding the reader that the rest of the story’s still there even when your attention is on the one page/panel is a very good one; in his article ‘Writing for Comics’ (written in the late 1980s in the UK comics fanzine Fantasy Advertiser, and probably available online somewhere), Alan actually referred to the fact that – although a lot of comics storytelling is likened to that of film – you have the power to go back and double-check something, or skip ahead if you choose, something which isn’t possible in film or TV or radio, but that comics share with novels. If memory serves, he compares it with the film (Greenaway ?) The Draughtsman’s Contract.
On a similar theme, I think there was some tale about Grant Morrison reading a comic after taking some drugs (as opposed to Doom Patrol which often appears to have been written in such circumstances), and when he accidentally turned back a few pages, thinking he’d travelled back in time.
I think you’ve chosen your sources extremely well – Eisner and McCloud, I feel, are amongst the most articulate people who’ve considered the various machanisms of the comics medium, and I’ve always felt that, along with the absence of sound effects and thought balloons, one of the strengths of Watchmen is Dave’s ability to present the moment – as you aver – as an almost photo-like freezing of a moment. There are few action lines, even during things like fight scenes, and coupled with Alan knowing just the number of words a panel will bear before it feels weird (as you say, the inclusion of narrative introduces a sense of time passing, and when that clashes with the time that the image appears to portray, then the awkwardness comes in; here, I’m thinking of Chris Claremont and Kevin Smith at their most wordy), I think Watchmen stands as -cliché ahoy – the Citizen Kane of comics. So, a good subject, well analysed on your part.
You deserve to get a good grade for this, no question about it.
Sudden thought : maybe back in the 1980s when more comics were sold in greater numbers, comics were more wordy, thus giving the feeling of value for money ? I can understand why slapping down three bucks for something you can read in three minutes might seen bad value when compared with a video or CD. Hmmm, could the drive towards realism in some way have damaged the way new readers view the medium ? Just a stray thought. |
|
|
