Kyle Baker’s subtle style in Nat Turner

Whoa! What an impressive piece of work. Kyle Baker’s Nat Turner was really something else.

This isn’t really a complaint, but I found myself constantly going back to take a second look at certain frames to fully understand the scene depicted. There were many instances where I just pressed forward totally confused (especially in the first two chapters). I suppose it’s just a complex book and should be praised for being so? A lot of things are implied in the frames, and many of them are subtle enough to miss.

I would also say that the first chapter was relatively unnecessary. I almost felt the whole time that Baker was trying to extend the story too far in the past (excessively so) and that the story really only needed to begin with Turner. I was just confused the whole time during the first two chapters — which one of these voiceless speakers was Turner? They all drawn similarly! Perhaps I was just overthinking it.

Once it was clear which character was Turner and once he had his epiphany and began his revolt, the book really picked up pace and everything really clicked. I then went back and re-read certain scenes to really understand ’em. Overall? Good book, glad I read it.

Nat Turner’s Potential

At first, I was surprised at how Baker portrayed the rebellion.  It was obviously going to be a violent event, but I remembered that Baker had described Nat Turner as a hero of his in the preface of the book.  So I found it odd that his hero and the blacks that he led were portrayed as utterly ruthless, killing men, women, and children alike without remorse.  Taking this into account, I got that the slaughtering of the whites was an abomination that was given birth to by the abomination of slavery.  In fact, there are scenes of pain, suffering, and horror throughout the entire book, none of which would have occurred were it not for slavery.

Nat Turner was a gifted and highly intelligent man, but unfortunately born into a life of servitude.  As a slave, it seems that he didn’t accomplish much more in life than a brutally violent, religion-inspired rebellion.  Given these facts, I’m led to imagine what good he could have accomplished and contributed to his society if he was a free man, and not burdened with the shackles of slavery.  People were naturally drawn to him due to his intellect and charisma, and he seems to be a born leader.  Would his leadership benefit his fellow man?  Would he still perceive himself as a Christ-like figure?  And how many other similar individuals with great potential might have been held back due to the circumstances of their birth?

The Dark Knight Returns, Responds, and then Rambles off.

I realize that this is being posted very late, I was in a small war with Agora and Agora fights dirty.  But e-mails have cleared the way for this delayed responce to Tuesdays Carrie based presentation.  Looking at it now it seems less like a responce and more like thoughts fed through a Ramblematic-5000.  In that vein, enjoy:

This is a response to the presentation on the Dark Knight Returns in today’s class and the discussion around it. During the presentation the character of Carrie Kelley was the focus, a strong female character (which she most certainly is). However, on the very same page used as the prime example in the presentation, page 89 in the edition I’m using, we also have the picture of a woman in the news wearing a shirt saying “all this and brains too” whom seems to be only interested in the perception of the mayor as opposed to the way things actually are. The style that the woman is presented in screams 1980s but it also, like nearly all portrayals of the media in the Dark Knight Returns, seems farcical. It always seems to me as sort of an example of feminist movement as a failure, or as a woman not belonging in the man’s world. I’m probably being colored by my familiarity with Miller’s later writing (300 having virtually none, and Sin City having none that aren’t battered, a whore, or a soon-to-be-killed lesbian) but I certainly wouldn’t call it misogynistic either. Rather I think its an example of opposition.

Miller loves oppositions. This entire graphic novel is full of them. We have the character of Dr. Wolper whom exists to espouse the ideology of the hypodermic model of media consumption. In the ludicrous level of naivete that Miller gives him, coupled with the constant farcical scrunched facial expressions leads one to believe he’s a simple attack on that mode of thought, especially seeing as how it nearly destroyed the comics industry several decades prior. But then we are presented with the crazy gunman and the thug without a purpose on pages 89 and 90 as being clear examples that the media coverage, if not directly influencing their behavior is at least exposing them to the concepts (or person as the case may be) that is. Furthermore, we have a reactionary, vigilante force that is the Batman (seriously though, the Wayne fortune would probably be better spent on education and rehabilitation than squandered on crime fighting gadgets) as an example of justice and civic virtue, but the president whom built his reputation on such values (or perceived to have such values at any rate) is made to be the fool throughout the piece. This is clearly a younger Miller open to embracing the Modernist theory on multiple and potentially equally valid viewpoints (something that is less obvious in his later works).

However there is still on opposition that isn’t quite representational fair, the only positive African American mentioned is Detective Dale, whom is never actually seen on panel, and the only other African Americans in the first two chapters are a pimp that’s cutting a whore and a street corner conman. I think I went above 250 words if that’s alright.

Wertham And Ec

I hate this man. I just do. I have a big Thing against censorship. Its just Evil. Especially for Americans, considering Freedom of Speech etc.
I happened to found myself fascinated by William Gaines. He Is Way too Ahead of Time–He should have worked for Hammer Horror films. I feel As though EC really Set The groundwork for further Comic Book exploration. Especially cOnsidering how many writers And artists were influenced by him.

Weekly Roundup (February 8-10)

If you’re in group 6, you’re responsible for this week’s weekly roundup. Each student in the group will highlight one key moment from the previous week’s online and in-class discussions. To recall the syllabus:

Follow this formula for the highlights: describe the moment (provide the context and the facts about what you saw, read, or heard), interpret the meaning of the moment (what does it mean?), and evaluate its significance (in other words, why was the moment important?).

You can post your highlight in the comments below.

Joker through the years

After reading the Dark Knight returns I thought that there was no way that this joker could have been approved by the “Comic Code” of the 50’s.  As it turns out he wasn’t.  This NPR article talks about the history of the infamous trickster.  He started out as homicidal maniac like his current incarnation, but when the comic code was instituted he was turned into a whacky tacky, goofball thief.  As the years progressed and the comic code became more lenient the artists and writers made him become a dark, twisted murderer again.

Holy respondents, Batman!

First off, I truly enjoyed the Tom Knapp analysis of the novel that ahart9 posted. It’s probably the most interesting take on the book that I’ve read yet! Really insightful — of course, except for the summary!

I also completely agree with ibahabib in that the reading felt a bit “choppy” at times. Yeah, the art is fantastic beyond belief (as is the story/characters), but, for me, some of the pages seemed a bit cluttered with information. I feel that some of the news clippings and segments should’ve been removed — a lot of them are just filler and are never referred to again!

Snigh‘s point about the fact that it would be hard to imagine a publication to “not change with the times” and that “it is interesting to see the implications of fashion, pop culture, and current events on the comic, shows, and movies.” I definitely noticed the same thing while reading — similar to Watchmen, the time period in which it takes place is unmistakable.

Lastly, I feel as though I might be on a similar boat as Michael Gillespie! While I didn’t necessarily feel “distracted,” I certainly found myself continuously “going back  so that I could understand what exactly was going on.” However, I always do this — whether it’s watching a film or reading a book, I always look for certain things the first time around (acting, camerawork, shot placement, artwork, scene length) and then rewinding (or flipping pages back) to catch what actually happened story-wise! Don’t get me wrong, though…I always pay attention to the story the first time around. It’s just that there’s just a lot more going on in any piece of work than merely the story.

Batman through the years

Dark Night Returns being a major reinvention of Batman made me wonder what the comics looked like before Frank Miller’s version. After some searching I found this site that put together a large image that takes a few issue covers from each decade Batman has been around and displays them along with a short description of the content and changes of each decade. Being around since the 1940s, there is a huge amount of Batman comics written and drawn by a number of different people. The covers provide a nice, quick way to see the differences in art style.

Batman: Everything is exactly the same, but totally different!

A great article I found on Batman gives you a new and intriguing look upon Batman: The Dark Knight Returns. A great beginning quote from the article is from Alan Moore himself, “Miller ‘has taken a character whose every trivial and incidental detail is graven in stone on the hearts and minds of the comic fans that make up his audience and managed to dramatically redefine that character without contradicting one jot of the character’s mythology. … Everything is exactly the same, except for the fact that it’s all totally different.”‘ As they go through the article the last quote is proven through comparisons to other versions of The Batman stories. Like how in the other stories when Batman is retiring they show him proud to have his young robin take his place and his son be the new side kick. But as seen in The Dark Knight Returns, that is not the case and he is actually having trouble with his retirement. Going through the article you get a better grasp on the Dark Knight story and a better look on Millers take on it.

A Bumpy Ride Through Gotham City

My first reaction to Batman: the Dark Knight Returns was that there were too many words. I felt as though I couldn’t pay enough attention to the images  in each panel, especially when the text was located in the white areas outside of the panels. The text was too distracting and I found myself paying too much attention to the text and skimming over the pictures. The best comparison I can give of  my reading experience of Batman is to that of reading a picture book because generally when reading a picture book I read the text and expect the pictures to just reinforce what the text is saying instead of providing additional information. Also the text is mainly what’s needed in order to understand the story.  The narrative in Batman seemed overwhelming to me and I believe that there is no way I would have been able to follow the storyline if the words were removed. I think that compared to God’s man the images used in Batman contained less information and narrative even though artistically the images weren’t any less detailed.  My reading experience felt choppy but I don’t think that only had to do with the fact that there were too many words. I think that the extreme changes in the format and sizes of the panels between each page caused some of the incongruity.  Some pages had 6 panels while others had sixteen. Some panels overlapped while others had large gaps between them.  Then there were some pages that were filled with what might amount to paragraphs of texts and others that only contained 2 words.  Although there may have been many hiccups during my reading I realize that this situation may be a storytelling technique used by the author. For example the author might have purposefully started the novel off on such disjointed way in order to depict Bruce Wayne’s struggle with the revival of Batman. Or maybe I’m just not used to the style of American graphic novels and this feeling of incongruity comes from that fact.

Group 2 – Batman; Commodity as Myth

I found this article to be extremely interesting. It was great to have the entire background stories for some of the most famous comic book characters within the article because I never knew about them. Growing up, I was never fully engulfed in comics or superheros. Now that I think about it, most of what I was exposed to was by watching television. Captain Planet was probably the closest thing to superheros that I ever watched. The ways in which this article encapsulated the very core of Batman and the story of how he came to be, both in our world and the world of Batman as a superhero was really cool because it makes Batman someone we can relate to and invites us into his world.

The time line that the article presents to the reader definitely sets the scene for just how far back the story of Batman goes back. It definitely opened my eyes to just how long superheros like Superman and Batman have been around. It also sparked a particular interest of mine to read that many of the “villains mirrored aspects of Batman’s character and development,” because it adds emphasis that the creators of Batman truly thought about what areas of the adventures of Batman would piece together to create an overall remarkable character. Just as the villains may provide insight into the history of Batman himself, they also created characters such as Alfred to add stability and comfort to the ever-chaotic lifestyle of the Batman(p.4).

Holy Time Warp, Batman!

After reading the article about the history of Batman, I was interested by the cultural twists and turns that the Batman series has taken. It is interesting to see how the Batman appears in the beginning of his career and how he looks now and to note all the little detours that have occurred in between. The amalgamation of figures used to conceptualize the first Batman, for instance, harkens to a time where crime fighters were about . . . well, fighting crime and crafting secret identities. Not much time seemed to be spent on the ethics of beating villains senselessly, it all seemed simple and tame (except for the BLAMS! to villain skulls).

Then there is the era of war propaganda, wherein Batman and Robin fight the forces of evil . . .  who happen to be Japanese. It is hard to imagine a time when it was so easy to be so blatantly racist without adding that “just kidding” element.

And how can we forget the campiness of the Batman live-action TV series with Adam West, complete with trippy transitions and even trippier Robin catchphrases.

Holy, Holy- Batman

And now today’s Batman (meaning within the last few decades) is the opposite: less dancing, more stabbing. We go from a Batman who has to save Robin on a regular basis and  to one who has to watch out for the cops because of child endangerment charges, among other things.

It would be hard to image a publication not change with the times, so it is interesting to see the implications of fashion, pop culture, and current events on the comic, shows, and movies. And yet one would have to wonder whether these changes make Batman who he is, a product of cultural change, or if it detracts from his origins and turns him into something other than Batman.

The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller

This is my first experience with Batman outside of major cinema (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight) and cartoons. The first thing I noticed off the bad was how distracted I felt as I read The Dark Knight Returns. I either found myself flying through the pictures or getting so distracted by the words that I didn’t notice the pictures. This being said I had to keep going back  so that I could understand what exactly was going on. I also found that there was a lot more action in this as opposed to Gods’ Man. There were also many more pictures on each page. There was also much less gutter space between images. This being said I had to use more imagination in Gods’ man than in this because I felt a lot more was given. For this reason the story was more straight forward and easy to understand.

One thing I thought was interesting and confusing at one time was how the novel would jump back and forth between action sequences with Batman and what was going on with the news and the public. Though I had to go back a few times I think this added a nice touch to the story. It allows a duel story where you see things through both the public’s eyes and through batman’s eyes. The way some were for batman and other were not really fascinated me. What did this do for everyone else? Did everyone enjoy this aspect of the book or did it confused them? Was this easier to read than Gods’ Man? If you are new to Batman in graphic novels like I am did this live up to what you know about Batman?

Weekly Roundup (February 1-3)

If you’re in group 5, you’re responsible for this week’s weekly roundup. Each student in the group will highlight one key moment from the previous week’s online and in-class discussions. To recall the syllabus:

Follow this formula for the highlights: describe the moment (provide the context and the facts about what you saw, read, or heard), interpret the meaning of the moment (what does it mean?), and evaluate its significance (in other words, why was the moment important?).

You can post your highlight in the comments below.

Original Edition of Gods’ Man

After reading Gods’ Man, I was curious as to how Lynd Ward presented his work to the general public. In the edition we read for class, there was one image per page However, there were images on the back’s of pages, allowing two images to sit side by side. In other versions of Gods’ Man, Ward put only one picture per page and had nothing on the back’s of pages, forcing the viewer to look at each image one at a time. This is the method that was used in the original edition, which was published in 1929. By clicking on each individual picture, you can see a large image of how each page looked.