Skip to main content

Winsor McCay and Little Nemo (2 Points)

 I think the most interesting thing to me about the Little Nemo comics is their context. From what I have seen in regards to 'Sunday Comics', very few comic creators stray away from snappy, quick humor or punchlines. Many of the art styles and stories are simple and rely on efficiency. With Winsor McCay and Little Nemo comics, however, a short story with very specific stylistic decisions is what makes them stand out from most Sunday comics. While the basic premise of Nemo falling asleep, having a dream that transforms into a nightmare, and jolting awake with the aid of one of his parents does not change, McCay still makes a successful effort to provide to the readers a world with depth. Additionally, we get to see more and more of the dream world with each new comic, rather than see the same generic setting that many artists default to in their comics. Furthermore, the art that Winsor McCay uses for his comic is not simply a quick and easily copied drawing. His style is refined and thought out; it is a couple steps away from realism (similar to the theme of his comic), his use of line-weight as a form of creating depth is perfect, and the colors he uses goes very well with the tone of each part of the comic. His display of uniqueness in art style also shows in his panel layouts. Some time the mishaps of Nemo by being offset from one another, while others break the grid of Sunday comics by putting an illustrated centerpiece in the middle of the page. Overall, I would say his work was unique and well thought out amongst other Sunday comic artists.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The History of Comics: The Loss of Ownership (3 Points)

 One trend that I felt was interesting, albeit upsetting, was that with the incentive of making money by creating comics, the lines of ownership of the artist's creation seem to blur. Of course, other factors lead to the uncertainty of giving credit where credit is due, such as having multiple people working towards one comic. However, I feel that when comics became more mainstream, companies valued the income that comics made over the treatment of the artist that created them. In particular, on pages 109 and 110 of The Comic Book History of Comics that Marvel allowed for the continuation of Stan Lee as the sole credit of their comics for quite some time, leaving artists like Steve Ditko and Jack Kirby unhappy with their lack of recognition. Marvel (and Stan Lee) made profit off of Stan Lee's rise to fame, practically letting people believe he was a genius for creating such works by himself. In actuality, talented artists were drawing and plotting the comics while Stan sometime...
Post a Comment
Read more

My Favorite Thing is Monsters (6 Points)

For the week that we read these, we were asked to discuss whether the comics we read should be considered literary or not. My first reaction was to break down what made something 'literary'. I was inclined to say that as long as something had words and was telling a story with some amount of depth, then that was what I considered literary. However, I realized while talking with team members about this question that I had a new consideration of literary comics. I like to think of comics the same way I think about art, and that is that anything can be art. I do not think that we have to tie down the constraints of what is and is not literary because that can put writers who just want to create into a bubble. Whether I used my old definition or my new definition, I think My Favorite Thing is Monsters is definitely a literary comic. It masterfully uses its media to tell a fantastic and relatable story. Everything about the comic felt real and was very engaging, the art felt in sync...
Post a Comment
Read more

Eisner Novel: A Contract with God (3 Points)

 This graphic novel was a tough read for me since it brought up some pretty touchy subjects. I think that Eisner dives into some sensitive subject because it was unique from the comparably 'safe' comics that others were producing. In the first part, it deals with a man who has been told all his life that God will favor him, but God betrays his trust when he takes away the life of his adopted daughter. Initially, I thought this story might have been a criticism of God and how people use him, but it seemed to make it more about making a victim of childhood lies into a bad guy and killing him off. I felt that this story was more about the unfairness surrounding the 'truths' he was told in his childhood. He was told all of his childhood life that because he did good things and helped people, God would help him and be there for him. Yet, when he needs God, his daughter dies, and understandably, he gets upset. It is upsetting that the comic makes such a bad thing out of going...
Post a Comment
Read more