Are graphic novels literature?

i'm going to suggest pic related- troubled souls by garth ennis. it's about northern ireland. it's not easy to find in book form but it's probably online somewhere.

i'm also going to guess that 99.9% of people either on this board or /co/ will never have heard of it.

also, alan moore knows the score

I tend to also recommend Persepolis, but I hear Palestine is also a good graphic novel. Junji Ito has a soft spot in Veeky Forums's heart too.

I don't think it should be much of an issue, user. These types of threads have been made here before and they tend to be pretty good, plenty of people on here enjoy graphic novels.

You could try Alex Alice's books
Asterios Polyp by Mazzucchelli
Habibi by Craig Thompson
Some people also tend to reccomend Jodorowsky's books

Also, Will Eisner's books and Frank Miller's Martha Washington's books

It's kind of silly question. They can have great writing. Is that what literature means? I would certainly call them literature, or capable of attaining the title, if we define literature as art primarily composed of words. Might be better to just call them their own medium of artistic vision though. Are films literature? The scripts can be beautiful, but it's mean to be seen and not read, though the same is obviously true of plays and we consider them to be literature.

same with audio books

Comics are a melding of literature and visual art, in the same way that a great novel needs to be more than just the plot/themes/ideas, a great comic needs to be more than just the words, it needs presentation, it needs style, it needs to be artistic in the merit of its own medium

Is it literature? Not in my opinion, it's its own thing.

Is it a book though? Yes, so you can include comics on things like top 40,000 books ever published or w/e.

I'm from Belfast and I hate Garth Ennis, he's also completely unkown here apart from capeshit nerds

Seqential art doesn't have the development of literature or cinema, so it is an underutilised medium. Great examples of comics are few and far between, doesn't help that most of its buyers only consume mediocre capeshit

I like Charles Burns, don't know if you would consider him literary but I like his use of avant-garde as an allegory in situations like in Black Hole.

I know this is a thread about comics but how does Veeky Forums feel about manga? I feel like manga has a better shot at being more literary than western comics because manga hasn't been completely ruined by Capeshit...Not yet anyway, I like the following: Junji Ito, Jiro Taniguchi, Satoshi Kon, Osamu Tezuka, Leiji Matsumoto, Taiyō Matsumoto, Shigeru Mizuki, also Yoshihiro Tatsumi is without a doubt Veeky Forums tier considering how he basically changed the very medium to telling more adult orientated style of storytelling.

Agreed, I think comics have been passed over precisely because of the development of film as a medium, if we imagine comics as a segue between the visual and the literary then it becomes obvious that film occupies a similar realm as well and film is, on a surface level, much easier to get into. I don't need to know how to draw to become a film maker, I just need to learn to point a camera at things, it's a more immediate style of storytelling, it's intuitive where the comic is deliberate. Likewise the distinction between author and artist is greater than that of author and director or cinematographer.

I think by western you mean american. Read some continental comics user, they're as a collective, usually more literary than the mass market capeshit american crowd.

I was referring to America, British and European comics but I'm planning on looking more into French comics lately since some of them sound pretty interesting. The only "capeshit" I read anymore are Valiant since I quite like their universe, especially how well they do status quo changes that actually feel like they matter.

What do you think of Mignola?

As someone who's probably read more comics than anyone on Veeky Forums right now I have to say no, comics are not literature. This isn't to discredit them - not in the slightest. Comics are their own medium and should be respected as such, in the same way film and music are also their own. You could make the argument that the scripts writers give to their artists are literature but that's as far as I would go.

Haven't actually read Hellboy or any other comics taking place in that universe but I like Rumble a fair bit and have it on my pull list, really love the artwork in that one.

The charts I'm about to post are /co/-certified but believe it or not /co/ does know a thing or two about comics.

...

Well that would be my rec to you then if you're looking to try and salvage a bit of the reputation of western comics.

To return to your main question, I think manga is easier to produce art for because the medium isn't in a stranglehold between big publishing companies that print primarily shared universes. Instead things can just be published in magazines dedicated to that sort of thing.

Actually why hasn't this been done before? Surely there's a market for small comics collections in the same way that people send in short stories and poetry for journals/magazines right?

Seems like a business opportunity lads

...

There's a good deal of monthly comics anthologies currently and formerly being published that are exactly what you just described. The problem isn't that there's no market for this stuff, it's that the way western comics are sold to this market is very shitty.

Truth be told, Marvel and DC aren't even the biggest problem with the industry at large, it's the way comics are distributed. Nobody but someone who's already interested in comics or sci-fi and fantasy would bother walking into a comics shop whereas you can find books, dvds, cds, etc in almost any major arts-related store you can think of.

Hmm, I wasn't even aware these existed which I guess speaks for itself. How do we fix distribution, I wonder?

Is the problem on the side of the publisher or the distributor? Is it that stores won't carry this material or that nobody bothers to try and get them to?

depends on what you consider literature is.

Depends on what the purpose of the arbitrary appendage is. If you're asking whether or not you can discuss them on a literature board, the answer is yes.

As someone who loves both art and books, I've never found much appeal in them.

Every few years I'll try buy a few and try to get into them. I have a Hellboy Anthology, Watchmen, Sandman, Elias the cursed, A few Moebius collected editions, Saga series. I also downloaded some others like the Nikopol trilogy.

Same thing always happens. If I like the art, I ignore the story and just look at the art. If I like the story, I ignore the art and just read it. In art, they just end up lacking because the format forces some amount of stylized brevity (except in the cases of Humanoids and Moebius, I guess). In story, they're far too short and the medium prevents expanding on most of things that would have been otherwise included in a normal book.

I can enjoy them in a general sort of way, and sometimes I'll take them off my shelf and page through them when the urge takes me, but I just can't consider them anything but oddities. They fail to satisfy any of my cravings.

It's a problem on the side of both. If Marvel and DC both decided to drop Diamond (the distributor) then Diamond would go under in a few months, if that. On the same token, if Marvel and DC were simultaneously dropped by Diamond their comics side might be irrevocably damaged. Indies would go under in either scenario. Diamond's the primary reason you don't see comics in grocery stores anymore (in my area that's actually making a slight comeback, but the point stands).

I also just want to say that Marvel and DC aren't only superhero books, though they obviously mainly are, in the same way that, say, Mark Twain was mainly a prose writer but there is poetry by him if you want to look for it, Marvel and DC are by and large superhero stories but they do have things like Vertigo lying around.

I think comics should be redistributed in every shops now and not just solely located to LCS. Most people who get into things like the MCU aren't even aware comic shops exist anymore but I think for that to work Marvel would probably have to liquefy their entire comic line and solely focus on the movies but that could potentially put entire shops out of business since Marvel is a big selling point and a household name even to people who don't know or like comics know them.

Nausicaa
A Drifting life
Most works by Taiyo Matsumoto
Swamp Thing
Shade The Changing Man & Enigma
Lone Wolf & Cub
The Collector (Sergio Toppi)
A Contract with God
Hellboy
Showa A history of Japan
Phoenix
The Walking Man
Kokou no Hito4

Sandman?

This question is always awkward, and I think what the OP means is if comics can be literary or on par with the great classics? It's kind of like asking if Stephen King or whatever genre fiction writer is literary or worthy of of being compared to the greats. But yeah there are some fantastic comics that utilize the medium to it's fullest extent to tell great stories just like films do.

>It's kind of like asking if Stephen King or whatever genre fiction writer is literary or worthy of of being compared to the greats.
If the Metamorphoses came out a hundred years later it would be considered genre fiction so I don't see why genre fiction can't be great.

I don't even hate genre fiction, and I love a well told pulp story just as much as anyone. But I get your point. Either way this question is dumb, just for the sake of the thread yes comics can have deep and rich characterization, and tell unique stories while exploring profound themes.

I apologize if my tone was a little abrasive, I actually agree with you about this being a dumb question. As someone who's an avid fan of both mediums it's always annoying to me how people think comics need to be the equal of literary greats to be great on their own. It's equally perplexing that you almost never see this question pertaining to the actual art within a comic - you never hear people asking if comics can be as moving as a painting.

I should add, I wasn't really disparaging genre fiction (although Stephen king blows) but that this question always reminds me of fans of genre fiction attempting to seek validation in what they like by asking people who read literary fiction that what they're reading is worthwhile and not a waste of time. The question is just awkward even if I know what he means, it's basically like asking if a story is deep and equating to that being worthwhile.

No, not really.

Just made this for you guys.

What a shitty, disproportionate image. Kill yourself.

No theyre comics you retard

As a general rule anything with marvel or dc logos on it and anything with a writer and artist is terrible.

The greatest cartoonists that i am aware of are clowes, ware, thurber, deforge, schruawen, mazzuchelli, herriman, crumb, moscoso, huizenga, hernandez bros, colwell, eisner and ARGUABLY johnny ryan, brandon graham and harvey kurtzman

Bone, marvels, making comics and science need to go

For the sake of bringing something to an irrelevant question (and can't you once pick something other than Watchmen, OP?),

To choose the books they read, as opposed to those they just look at, comic readers primarily follow writers. Just don't make the mistake of following them into their for-hire work (eg going from Fraction's Casanova to his Marvel boilers).

>Alex Ross
The essence of "look, we also do detailed art!". He's a good artisan and a bad artist.
>McCloud
No words for you.
>Zach Weiner
Cartoons should deserve their own category

the only people who think graphic novels are legit works of literature are people who think it's embarrassing to read comic books as an adult and want validation and acceptance

i am an adult who reads comic books and i am comfortable with that.

My nigga, I feel the exact same way about his art. Haven't read Marvels but read Kingdom Come, and it was just off putting to me. I can admit he's definitely skilled at drawing really hyper realistic characters, but it felt kind of soulless to me.

It should be said that Will Eisner, the creator of the term graphic novel, willingly admitted validation was the entire reason he made it up. He also called comics comics when he wasn't trying to impress outsiders.
He's fantastic as a cover artist but the comics medium just isn't one that fits well with the type of paintings he makes. Jim Lee has the same problem.

You are doing it wrong if you follow writers, the best comics are almost all made by one person. Writers are generally terrible at planning a page or pacing, they are basically only as good aa the artist they chose to work with, compare a comic book masterpiece like Quimby the Mouse or Asterios Polyp to the so called 'masterpieces' of sandman or miracleman to see what im talking about. Or, for an even more jarring comparison, look at hellboy solos and the BPRD comics

Felt the same exact same way, that while I love his covers for Astro City, I would hate if he actually illustrated the entire comic himself.

Maus is nothing when compared with Alan Moore's works. The graphic is not on par, the writing is not on par. Alan Moore is the true Veeky Forums GN author

How about this? Just trying to get a good mix of the entire medium in a few comics.

>Writers are generally terrible at planning a page or pacing
It's part of a comic book writer's job. Those who can't do it are bad writers. One of the reason why Grant Morrison is a bad writer. There's no argument there, really.
>comics... made by one person
Who are consequently writers... but technicalities aside, if you're interested in the type of work put out by full authors, you'd be better off sticking to european comics.

Can you put asterios polyp in the missing slot.

>sandman
I don't think sandman is a particularly good comic overall, but what is wrong with its page compositions?

They arent writers, they are cartoonists. Calling them a writer when most have formal training in art is ridiculous, like claiming james joyce is a 'proser' . Quimby The Mouse doesnt even have words in it, for example.

And youre very very wrong about cartooning being European. Fantagraphics, D&Q, Koyama, Picturebox, Kitchen sink e.t.c. all publish almost exclusively comics made by one person, there are also countless cartoonists who are published by either general book publishers or self publish.

It's pretty common for Morrison to draw outlines of pages for his artists, actually. Morrison was originally a writer-artist when he started out.

I am on my phone so cant post an example but the pages range from pedestrian to downright sloppy. Thankfully Sandman Overture had a good artist rather than the various average nobodies who drew vertigo house style for the original series.

Not a page but here's another example. The sketches and anecdotes to pages like these are in a number of Morrison trade paperbacks, I doubt you've read much by him if you didn't know this until now.

Could go on but I think I've made my point.

Could you post some examples when you get access to a computer? I'm legitimately interested in this kind of analysis.

Yeah i will make a couple of posts tomorrow morning (about 9 hours from now) as long as this thread is still around

The dynamism in the original sketch is so much better than the final product.

here's some worthy manga

Why are comics so expensive, jesus

Doing it is a very different thing from doing it well. No, I'm not familiar with what he did before 2000ad, but none of that is what anyone refers to when talking Morrison. With few exceptions, the paneling and text pacing (not even getting into narrative pacing) in his finished products range between mediocre and awful. You can't put it all on the backs of the artists.

Bought this other day. I really enjoyed reading Under The Red Hood between the chapters. Damn shame it was short, but still good.

would you consider this literature. I think not. this is smut and Alan Moore is a pedo

>mfw Watchmen is a comic book approximation of Gravity's Rainbow except with capeshit and muh Richard Nixon instead of V2s and World War 2.

I swear, the Nite Owl - whatsherface romance is like a straight rip of Roger Mexico and Jessica Swanlake romance.

Understanding Comics is a way better book

I don't see how

No one would ever think to call Druillet, Giraud, Bilal or Liberge "cartoonists"

Nite Owl kissing in the shock of a nuclear explosion? The doomed love? Swanlake and Mexico kissing in the aftershock of a V2? Shy, normal guy stuck with psychos, girlfriend trying to maintain his innocence? Really, you don't see it?

Don't think you read GR. Moore even said in an interview GR was a huge influence.

Yes they would you clueless fuck, bilal literally has an award for best international cartoonist and the others are all referred to as cartoonists on their wikipedia pages as well as in various articles

No, they are graphic novels.

I have really enjoyed Blast by Manu Larcenet, and his other comics as well. I don't know if Blast has been translated in english but if you can find it I recommend you to give it a try.

Woah this looks amazing

Is it in french?

The original books are in french, but it has been translated to german and finnish at least, I'm not so sure about other languages.

They can be. It might be more accurate to call them their own thing, but I don't think there's enough of them to get one.

Persepolis is pretty good if not a little more for young adults.

The Wrenchies is my personal favorite.

>a thread died for this
No
fuck off

Can you please stop making this thread

Memories of Emanon was fuckin great

oh no our precious threads

glad to see the invisibles on at least one of these charts, its one of my goto recs

When will this meme fucking die?!! fuck off!