Count me among those who don't get Jimmy Corrigan or Acme Novelty Library. Nothing against people who do... plenty of people don't like the comics or movies I dig... but I've never understood the fuss.
And I know this is heresy, but when I started studying and doing research about making comics back six or seven years ago, I found McCloud's books hard to follow. They didn't grab me in the same way "The DC Comics Guide to Writing Comics" did. I'm just dense, I guess.
And I know this is heresy, but when I started studying and doing research about making comics back six or seven years ago, I found McCloud's books hard to follow. They didn't grab me in the same way "The DC Comics Guide to Writing Comics" did. I'm just dense, I guess.
Everyone processes information differently. I learned so much more about making comics by reading Eisner's graphic novels, which I love, than I did by reading his textbooks, which I found incredibly dry.
I learned so much more about making comics by reading Eisner's graphic novels
Yes! Reading the old collections of The Spirit that I borrowed from the library during that early "training" period were incredibly valuable. So was reading "Writers on Comics Scriptwriting" vols. 1 and 2, and the accompanying book about the artists. Anyone getting into comics needs to read those three books.
@RussellLissau I have both volumes of those Scriptwriting Volumes and they helped me immensely early on. Definitely recommended reading. I'm a fan of Understanding Comics too alongside Matt Madden's '99 Ways to Tell a Story'.
@DanHill, if you haven't read the Artist version, go get it. As good as the writer volumes were to help me determine how to write, the Artist volume told me what artists expect in scripts, and that helped immensely.
Acme Novelty Library--you might not like the stories, but you have to admire the way that Ware assembles a page. Nobody else does anything like it.
I'm not big on textbooks. I have Robert McKee's book sitting unread on my shelf next to Syd Field's book, also mostly unread. I did enjoy J. M. Straczynski's book back in the 90s, although I'm not really a fan of any of his work.... but even then I was mainly interested in style and formatting. I have never read a textbook on writing comics.
For my money, the best tutorial on writing is Elmore Leonard's 10 Rules of Writing, which will take you 10 minutes to read.
I learned more from workshops and... well, from reading... classes than from reading any book or class.
A nice list, Eric, and I agree about Cages, it's both a complex narrative and uses the medium well. And I think that you are absolutely correct that there is a bias towards more complex, literarily mature narratives over technical exploration or mainstream in considering a canon of great graphic novels.
But then it makes some sense; dazzling and inventive technique, or bravura draughtmanship provide delights and pleasures in their own right, but ultimately should be in service to the story, whereas, a great story IS the point.
A thoughtful list on will incorporate some books simply for their technique, just as it will incorporate some manga, some European classics and some super heroes. And perhaps some Barks Donald Duck... if there were any that could properly be called graphic novels.
So books like Fun Home are favored in these kinds of lists. Something like Asterios Polyp gets thought of in this context because it tells a subtle story and its technical whiz-bangery is an extra.
Understanding Comics is not without its critics, although mostly its academic types with different critical biases.
I suggested five "first ballot " Hall of Fame books and I think that several are distinctly of lesser quality then some others that came later. But all of them would likely make most (all) knowledgeable readers lists, and that's ultimately what this comes down to.
The first two have some history on their side. Asterios Polyp is the kind of book that merits consideration. Will it be in the top 50 twenty years from now? Lets all live long enough to find out.
Windsor McCay's Little Nemo in slumberland, while not necessarily a graphic Novel, I think, HAS to be HIGH on this list, if not first and foremost. McCay literally laid so much ground work in terms of storytelling and shear imagination, that comics would not be where they are now without him. At SDCC I was looking over the reprint books- the HUGE ones and I can say that I was in awe at what I was looking at. Everything else just pales next to it.
McCay is also an excellent cautionary example for letterers. (Aside: There's currently a remake/remodel thread on WhiteChapel for Little Nemo, which my pal Zlatan has already submitted to.)
Nemo is certainly a universally acknowledged Hall of Fame founding member for All Comics and Comic Strips. Of course work that comes early in a medium normally has a head up on later work, but the quality of imagination and draftsmanship that Winsor McCay showed is astonishing. He was also an influential early animator.
Observation only, not an indictment nor personal opinion:
These canonical landmarks' impact is still mostly only felt among the elitist edge of comics, while the bulk of the mainstream continues to represent almost everything these comics/books/strips attempted/attempt to redefine/move away from.
It's just like pop music. The most cutting-edge, "influential" artists/albums only really show their influence in the fringes, while the biggest-selling music continues to be ... well, what it is.
Righteo and that dilemma is part of what I hoped we might address when I started this thread. Canons, in addition to being vaguely defined and having very soft edges, are elitist. They take a side on the whole issue of "high vs popular" art and make the claim that there is benefit in highlighting some kind of defined High art, preserving it, and promoting it. When its well done, an open minded reader might discover works that deepen their understanding of the form... at least, that is the hope.
Thinking about Maus a little bit today, because my wife sent me this link from a college instructor who teaches Maus in class.
From the Illustration Blog I've been raving about, Apatoff addresses the drawing as drawing in Maus and finds it lacking as a demonstration of drawing skill. Fair enough, but of course comics exist at the intersection of words and drawings, and this author gets that, even if his focus is on the literary aspects. I suspect that Apatoff gets that as well, but his focus in the Illustration Blog is different.
Maus is memorable to me, artwise, not so much because of Spiegelman's draftmanship but because of his compositions.
Compositional sense might be the fundamental skill in comics that is most often overlooked. That, for me, has always been the difference between, say Neal Adams and Jim Lee; both are great illustrators, but Adams' eye for page layouts is leagues ahead of Lee's. It's also what keeps books like Pedro and Me, Persepolis, and Fun Home out of my (so-called) canon. They're all good stories, well-told, but none of them displays the command of the medium (and all that it's capable of) that we see from Will Eisner or Chris Ware or Moore/Gibbons.
I can only judge this based on my own preferences, obviously. Some of the best graphic novels/collected comics I've ever read, and would recommend without hesitation, are:
It's a Good Life If You Don't Weaken by Seth
Hicksville by Dylan Horrocks
Watchmen by Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons
Hate! by Peter Bagge
Starman by James Robinson and Tony Harris (and company)
Swamp Thing by Alan Moore and company
Animal Man by Grant Morrison (and Chas Truog)
Scalped by Jason Aaron and company
Dork by Evan Dorkin
American Flagg! by Howard Chaykin
Acme Novelty Library by Chris Ware
Stuck Rubber Baby by Howard Cruse
The Golden Age by James Robinson and Paul Smith
Fell by Warren Ellis and Ben Templesmith
Stormwatch/The Authority by Warren Ellis and company
Batman: Year One by Frank Miller and David Mazzuchelli
Uncanny X-Men by John Byrne, Terry Austin and Chris Claremont
Concrete by Paul Chadwick
Preacher by Garth Ennis and Steve Dillon
Casanova by Matt Fraction and Gabriel Ba
Pussey! by Dan Clowes
The Spirit by Will Eisner and company
And the list doesn't include many favorites, or favorite creators. Canon? I don't know. That might be a different list altogether.
Its a quality list, Clay, and more than a few of these seem to pop up often as consensus picks, and that's pretty much what the Canon comes down to. A loose collection of consensus picks with fuzzy edges.
Concrete was lovely. But its like the ball player who had the great career, an All-Star, MVP, Batting Title, but not quite Hall of Fame. Good that its still remembered though.
Comments
And I know this is heresy, but when I started studying and doing research about making comics back six or seven years ago, I found McCloud's books hard to follow. They didn't grab me in the same way "The DC Comics Guide to Writing Comics" did. I'm just dense, I guess.
I'm not big on textbooks. I have Robert McKee's book sitting unread on my shelf next to Syd Field's book, also mostly unread. I did enjoy J. M. Straczynski's book back in the 90s, although I'm not really a fan of any of his work.... but even then I was mainly interested in style and formatting. I have never read a textbook on writing comics.
For my money, the best tutorial on writing is Elmore Leonard's 10 Rules of Writing, which will take you 10 minutes to read.
I learned more from workshops and... well, from reading... classes than from reading any book or class.
But then it makes some sense; dazzling and inventive technique, or bravura draughtmanship provide delights and pleasures in their own right, but ultimately should be in service to the story, whereas, a great story IS the point.
A thoughtful list on will incorporate some books simply for their technique, just as it will incorporate some manga, some European classics and some super heroes. And perhaps some Barks Donald Duck... if there were any that could properly be called graphic novels.
So books like Fun Home are favored in these kinds of lists. Something like Asterios Polyp gets thought of in this context because it tells a subtle story and its technical whiz-bangery is an extra.
I suggested five "first ballot " Hall of Fame books and I think that several are distinctly of lesser quality then some others that came later. But all of them would likely make most (all) knowledgeable readers lists, and that's ultimately what this comes down to.
What did you like about it, Ryan?
(Aside: There's currently a remake/remodel thread on WhiteChapel for Little Nemo, which my pal Zlatan has already submitted to.)
These canonical landmarks' impact is still mostly only felt among the elitist edge of comics, while the bulk of the mainstream continues to represent almost everything these comics/books/strips attempted/attempt to redefine/move away from.
It's just like pop music. The most cutting-edge, "influential" artists/albums only really show their influence in the fringes, while the biggest-selling music continues to be ... well, what it is.
Righteo and that dilemma is part of what I hoped we might address when I started this thread. Canons, in addition to being vaguely defined and having very soft edges, are elitist. They take a side on the whole issue of "high vs popular" art and make the claim that there is benefit in highlighting some kind of defined High art, preserving it, and promoting it. When its well done, an open minded reader might discover works that deepen their understanding of the form... at least, that is the hope.
Thinking about Maus a little bit today, because my wife sent me this link from a college instructor who teaches Maus in class.
From the Illustration Blog I've been raving about, Apatoff addresses the drawing as drawing in Maus and finds it lacking as a demonstration of drawing skill. Fair enough, but of course comics exist at the intersection of words and drawings, and this author gets that, even if his focus is on the literary aspects. I suspect that Apatoff gets that as well, but his focus in the Illustration Blog is different.
I found this to be a worthwhile article, though.
The rest, I'll have to give considerable thought to.
http://www.comicsbeat.com/2011/08/05/the-international-best-comics-poll-picks-top-ten/