“A Family Tragicomic” is definitely the proper title for Bechdel’s memoir. It is a fascinating journey of speculation from beginning to end. It is best described as a tragedy because Bechdel describes not only her own journey, but the presumed journey of her father as he comes to terms with his own sexuality, growing up in a time when such a thing was not talked about in a public forum. Bechdel uses the text and visuals in a very effective manner, allowing the two elements to speak to one another. On page 191 specifically, Bechdel describes the time where her and her father attend A Chorus Line. In the visuals, her and her father are depicted sitting next to each other, wide eyed and attentive to the play as one of the characters says, “One day I looked at myself in the mirror and said, “You’re fourteen years old and you’re a faggot. What are you going to do with your life?” In this next panel, Bechdel’s own narrative dialogue reads, “I did not draw a conscious parallel to my own sexuality, much less to my father’s.” Again, the visuals depict Bechdel and her father with the same wide eyed look, their gazes paralleling each other as if they are sharing a moment together of coming to terms with their sexualities. These visuals and the narrative shows how Bechdel seems to have a better relationship with her father than might have been presumed in the previous chapters. It shows how on some higher level, almost a spiritual one is where Bechdel has a more stable relationship with her father. The tragedy is that his lifestyle seems to lead to his death, leaving Bechdel to only ponder and speculate on what could have been. The novel no doubt seems to read as one possessing a therapeutic nature, as writing about a traumatic family experience helps put the past to rest by exposing a deep secret. Thus, it not only becomes Bechdel’s burden but the whole worlds to share in.
Author Archives: bfleser
http://www.progressive.org/radio_bechdel06
Here is a pretty interesting interview with Bechdel on progressive radio. she gives an overview of her book in this interview, touching on the social and political climate of her time. i found this article pretty interesting. out of the three personal memoirs, in two of them the protagonists are seeing therapists. bechdel mentions briefly how she is seeing a therapist now. both spiegelman’s and bechdel’s family experiences have been more than traumatizing, each dealing with tragic deaths in their families. These relationships are pretty fascinating, which is why i think the memoirs make for good reads. anyhow, the interview is pretty cool and covers some good topics.
In My Darkest Hour-Response to lkelly6
I think lkelly6 and I probably hold the same viewpoint regarding IMDH. The one thing that I could appreciate the most was the art; the juxtaposition of the drawings with real photographs. I personally liked the Taxi Driver poster on Omar’s wall. Good movie. It sort of made for a very surrealist/expressionist environment, which I suppose was the whole point of this story. But other than that, the story line, the theme (if there is one; there probably is), the overall message, I just wasn’t feeling it. I get where the author is coming from, what with the jarring, disturbing images meant entirely to make you feel uncomfortable. The artwork in the story seems to encapsulate the images going on inside Omar’s head, showing an alternative perspective of reality, showing life as madness. We are introduced to a dark world with no meaning, where pleasures serve as temporary pick me ups but ultimately lead to more depression. To me, it was the story of a man’s search for meaning but coming up short.
Which leads me now into the question about the corporate logos. I absolutely think Santiago was criticizing these big corporations. They seemed to play a more general role in the overarching theme of life as madness. And if you look at the ‘Acknowledgements’ section of Santiago’s book, one of the people he lists is Jello Biafra. Jello Biafra was the former lead singer of the Dead Kennedy’s, a punk rock band from the ‘80’s. Most people probably know what I’m talking about. Today, Biafra is an adamant, direct action, political activist poet, very much in favor what we would call “far left” causes. One of the big things he attacks is corporate America. You can see this influence in IMDH, with the television programs, the political figures, and the corporate logos such as Mrs. Fields and “Faux.” The most vivid criticism of this is the page towards the end depicting the meat packing plant, with various corporate logos labeling each section of the meat packing plant. I think Santiago, from his own political views, is saying that corporate America contributes to the chaos that is life, influencing and controlling our lives through consumption, or something like that. I think this then plays into the overall theme of Omar’s situation, how politics and corporate America are in some ways an indirect influence on his life, contribution to his lack of control over himself, given that life is such a “madhouse” and all that. I think the images of the Bush Administration and the news feed about the Iraq war contribute immensely to this as well. It is interesting that the book ends with the prelude to the Iraq war, as if trying to say this whole game of madness is controlled by those in power. I mean, I’ve seen stuff like this before. Disturbing images with a broader message about the life we live in and how its so bad and all that good stuff. Sure, yeah, I get it, just don’t expect me to agree with it.
interview w/ satrapi
In this brief interview with marjane satrapi, satrapi gives a quick overview of the story she captures in The Complete Persepolis. For example, she discusses the issue of the obligatory wearing of the veil for women. In one of the first pages of the book, there is a picture of the girls playing with their veils. Satrapi discusses how this picture was not an exaggeration, the girls really did take their veils off and play with them each chance they got, claiming that the wearing of the veil was not the choice of the Iranian people. I thought it was especially interesting how Satrapi talked about the apparent freedom of the press that exists in Iran now. I would need to do more research on this, because i interviewed an Iranian refugee about 2 years ago who told me that the press was still government controlled, and that you could criticize the government in the media. maybe this has changed, i don’t know. It was cool to hear Satrapi give a brief overview of what she was trying to capture in her book during the Islamic revolution. It sort of gives you a better insight into Satrapi’s approach.
ben
First Reader-Jimmy and James
What I’ve found most interesting thus far about Jimmy Corrigan, The Smartest on Earth is how the novel is as much Jimmy’s grandpa’s story as it is Jimmy’s. I actually find myself much more compelled and moved by Jimmy’s grandpa, James’ story. It might possibly be one of the most depressing things I’ve read but I could not stop reading into it. I am still looking for ways in which the two stories parallel each other. They parallel each other in the sense that both James and Jimmy are social outcasts, emotionally detached characters. Their situations differ however in that James’ scenario has a more serious undertone to it. His story displays a boy who is emotionally scarred and longs for his mother, to which his father blames him for his mother’s death. You could read into Jimmy’s story as having a very serious undertone to it as well, as he grew up without a father figure and is emotionally burdened because of it. The whole book may very well be a commentary on the family life, and the effects a broken home may have on a child. The two stories contrast each other though, as Jimmy’s story displays a jarring sense of humor and awkwardness. We might find it harder sympathize with Jimmy because of his painfully awkward mannerisms and his sporadic sexual fantasies, making his world seem strange and uncomfortable. With James’ story, there are definitely those moments of awkwardness, but not emphasized as much. James is a boy that has just been dealt a bad hand of cards. His father is an asshole, his mother died when he was born, and the kids at school joke about killing him. I personally found it easier to sympathize with James as he is a kid that has just been bullied his whole life and is looking for a sense of peace. As far as I am in the story, I’m not sure what Jimmy wants yet, and sometimes his awkwardness is just painful. I suppose the disorganized panels sort of add to the jarring effect of the two stories, as both convey a sense of twisted emotion on their own levels. But seriously, when reading about Jimmy’s grandfather, I thought it was the saddest thing in the world.
Question for respondents: what do you make of those damn peaches?
Respondent-Variations in Perspective in Maus
To answer the question about whether or not we think Vladek’s recollection is framed by his own bias or if he is the way he is because of traumatic experiences, I would agree that yes, both situations apply. Everyone always has a bias and a subjective perspective when recollecting something from memory. If you put 99 people in a room to observe the same thing, you’re going to get 99 different perspectives about what was observed. This isn’t to say that someone’s perspective and recollection is more or less true than the other, its just fragments of the truth, but nevertheless, contains truth. I actually found myself asking the same question as I was reading Maus. I was very moved and compelled by the story as I was reading it, but I couldn’t help but ask myself at times, “Is this really the way it happened? Could it be possible that this is just one man’s subjective perspective on the way things were? Wouldn’t someone else who was there say different, even opposing things?” This is, of course, is my attempt to approach this from an “objective, literary” angle. Well, I think the obvious answer would be yes, things really happened this way, and yes, if you ask someone else who was there with Vladek, they might say something completely different. We know the Holocaust was real, and we know, or trust rather, that Vladek was really there as well. There might be some things missing or inaccurate about his story because of his bias in perspective, but we know the general construct of his story to be true. I think this is the interesting about making Vladek’s story into a comic book. Comics only show fragments of what is going on, not the whole “truth” if you will. But we know the general, overall story to be true. In the case of Vladek’s story, despite missing pieces, we are given much reason to believe, based off what we already know in history, that his overall story is true. The interesting thing about Maus is that Vladek is our only source of knowing, everyone else, such as Art’s mother, has passed. Much remains in ambiguity because there are stories and perspectives we will never hear.
I would definitely say though that Vladek’s behavior is a result of traumatic experiences of his past. I mean, he has had to endure some of the worst experiences known to man, the holocaust and his wife committing suicide. If you observe Vladek’s behavior, it is pretty clear that he acts this way as a result of his past. In volume 1, Art notes that Vladek always got mad at him for a kid for not eating all the food on his plate. Also, the fact that Vladek has saved so much stuff, and refuses to spend money on what he sees as unnecessary things. I would assume these are symptoms of being a holocaust survivor, as at that point, even the most basic resources were hard to come by. It does not surprise me that Vladek acts in such a way. So in conclusion, yes, I agree that both apply to Vladek and his perspective.
First Reader-The Dark Knight Returns, Ben Fleser (Group 1)
Personally, what I’ve found so far to be most intriguing about Batman: The Dark Knight Returns is the fact that Bruce Wayne is now an old man, subjected to the obstacles and barriers of old age; stiff joints, a little more winded, etc. However, the art in the comic might suggest that Batman is going about his usual business untouched by the pangs of old age, as he seems just as agile and swift as usual. This is where dialogue is contrasted nicely with art, as it gives the reader the notion of a character’s physical ailments when it’s harder to be represented through art. An example is on page 49 where we see Batman climbing up one of Gotham’s towers, “Pain that’s three days old crawls across my back. I kick the dust from my joints and climb. It used to be easier” (Miller, 49). I imagine that Miller had to be very conscious of the fact that he is trying to present Bruce Wayne/Batman in his elder years, so the dialogue as well as the art must reflect this so that readers have a good idea of the concept. Forgive me for my Batman history arrogance, but was The Dark Knight Returns the first comic about Batman where he’s portrayed as an old man? Because I know this idea was used later in things such as Batman Beyond, the cartoon. If so, I appreciate Miller’s adaptation of Batman because it seems a little more realistic for me, if only slightly. People don’t stay young and agile forever, so presenting notions of the passage of time, aging, and eventual death, subjects super heroes and other comic book characters to the same things normal humans are subjected to. At least I think this is what Miller wanted to get at, after reading his introduction. We see Commissioner Gordon wrestling with this reality on page 58 when he says, “A young boy dashes past me, healthy, dirty, and beautiful. You don’t want to know what he makes me think of.” And later, “Dying never seemed real to me when I was young” (Miller, 58). For me, these realities make the characters’ struggle that much more complex, as they fight not only against evil, but against themselves (See page 55). Overall, I think the notion of time is important concept to bring up when dealing with comics, as we will see this idea explored immensely in Watchmen.
Finally, (and I swear I’m done talking after this), I like the great debate that is being brought up over Batman in The Dark Knight Returns, as psychologists in the story keep trying to deconstruct him on sociological and psychological terms. I appreciate the debate being raised as it tries not to allow us to side immediately with Batman despite our strong inclinations. However, given the scenario of the story thus far, it might be pretty easy to side with him. But I don’t know, it’s up to you, and I haven’t finished yet so don’t give anything away for me. Just a few questions, does Batman shoot that guy on pages 64 and 65? I assume that’s what happened but I just needed some clarification. And how the hell did Bruce Wayne lose his mustache? I was confused at that.