Can comic books be considered “serious” art? Or perhaps the more appropriate question might be, “Why can’t comic books be considered serious art?” Comic books have been a pervasive element of pop culture for many years. With their beginnings as newspaper comics, drawing similarities with pulp magazines, and on further into the superhero age, comics have evolved and have become increasingly sophisticated over the years.
At one time, comic books might have prompted the contempt of adults, who might have said something like, “Why don’t you read a real book?” Nowadays, you’re more likely to see adults reading comics themselves than scolding their teenagers for lack of literary taste. Contemporary comics have seen authors delving into topics like war, vigilantism, and even philosophy. This proves that this genre, with its broad spectrum of subject matter, has more literary merit than previously suspected. Given the emergence of this medium of narrative and artistic expression, it seems inevitable that a debate must ensue as to whether or not comics are worthy of literary merit.
Comic Books and Education
Universities are not unwilling to admit that comics are sophisticated enough for further study, but most programs tend to focus on graphic novels, which more closely resemble actual novels in narrative technique and subject matter. Not surprisingly, many courses dedicated to the study of comic books are offered at respected institutions, which have more frequently included comic studies as part of their catalog.
For example, The University of Florida has positioned itself as a premier institution for the study of comics as literature, to include a conference on comics, now in its 9th year. Now there’s a conference you might actually stay awake at!
Many colleges have comic books in their libraries, but what you might not expect alongside the many literary classics at Duke University is the Mother Lode of all comic book collections. The Edwin and Terry Murray Comic Book Collection at the Rubenstein Library contains over 67,000 comic books donated as part of a comprehensive collection spanning forty years! That’s enough to keep an entire legion of nerds busy for decades. This collection includes an extensive collection of Marvel and DC Comics, among others.
(Maus, Is a graphic novel that won the Pulitzer Prize)
During four years of rigorous training in college writing and discussing books, I spent most of my time devoted to studying real books. The reality is that it was a welcome reprieve to find myself in my senior year reading none other than comic books. Among the graphic novels we studied were, Persepolis and Maus. These two graphic novels are among the most frequently cited as being serious art. I would also agree that the complexity of the narratives, coupled with the artwork certainly qualifies these two books as titles of significant artistic value.
Most of the debate around literary merit seems to exclude graphic novels, at least to a certain degree. In the following video posted by TVOParents, you’ll get a balanced discussion of the issue, featuring professor Larry Swartz, graphic novelist Jeff Smith of Bone fame, and novelist Mahtab Narsimhan. This video presses some significantly relevant questions regarding graphic novels.
[Video] Are Graphic Novels Good Enough for School?
(If you liked TVO’s Graphic Novel video, you may also enjoy further discussion in their blog post on Comic Book Heroes and Villains.)
You’d be surprised, and perhaps pleased to know that a classroom full of college students are entirely capable of engaging in a vigorous, intellectual discussion about comics, discussing their tropes and metaphors, as well as finding many similarities with other works of literary merit. Still, there seems to be a lingering question. When we ask ourselves whether comic books can be considered serious art, are we not asking a larger question at the same time? That question, gnawing at the back of our minds, is what is art?
Some Considerations
To really get to the bottom of this question would require far more inquiry than a single blog post could provide. A much more thorough investigation than I’ve provided here, as well as a killer reading list, is available at Wired Magazine’s interesting take on tech and parenting via the GeekDad Blog. This series of 8 blog posts entitled, “Comics as Literature,” by the brilliant Jonathan H. Liu, provides a great overview of the trends in graphic novels and comic art. My favorite part of this series was his barometer for literary merit, which was a evaluation of two critical categories, “length” and “death.” This formula seems pretty accurate considering one of the greatest American novels, Moby Dick succeeds in the length and death categories in whale-like proportions.
It seems posterity has a lot to do with whether a book, graphic or otherwise, succeeds at gaining a wide audience. Who could argue that Stan Lee’s Spiderman hasn’t achieved some degree of posterity? I highly doubt that Spiderman will be going anywhere. In fact, I have no doubts that my son will be telling his son about Spiderman. It’s almost like comic books have achieved a folkloric quality. Think about it. These stories are continuously retold, often embellished upon, and shared among various new artists and reinterpreted. Spiderman is the Blues in paper and ink.
[Video] Stan Lee Hates Good Looking Superheroes
If popularity has anything to do with whether or not a comic is deemed serious art, than what about Charles M. Shulz? The Peanuts comic strips have survived for over 60 years! This includes thousands of comic strips, and his readership is among the widest readerships of comic strips in history. So if popularity is a factor, than Snoopy wins hands down.
When I was a kid, I had comic books all over my walls. At night, I’d pull them out of their protective sleeves, and I tried to draw the heroes in the comics I read with a pencil. I think one reason I enjoyed them so much is because they inspired me to create. Through the years I’ve come to the conclusion that if a piece of art inspires you to think something, feel something, or do something than it’s art worth taking serious. It makes little difference whether societal norms have determined it “serious” art. If it has the ability to inspire or bring you some happiness, than it has proved its worth.
As I wrote this blog post, I reminisced about my early comic book days. I still own a copy of Wolverine’s first comic, and I asked myself a lot of questions. I thought about how much I loved Sam Kieth’s Wolverine artwork, and I asked myself questions like, “Why am I not following Neil Gaiman, the writer for The Sandman series, on Twitter, yet?” Remember, it’s never too late to fall back in love in with comic books, and that’s advice you can take seriously.
What are some of your favorite picks for graphic novels and comic books? Do you think comic art deserves more recognition as a serious art form? Contribute to the discussion in our comments section below. Pencils.com appreciates your readership and we look forward to hearing from you.
Great article. Very thought provoking. The video though was a little frustrating. Jeff Smith had a lot of good points on readers still needing to use their imaginations to complete implied transitions between panels. What wasn’t touched on was the history of comics as first and foremost entertainment.
The birth of the comic book came at a point in time when publishers were kings. When newspapers could topple corrupt Mayors. The era of William Randolf Hearst. Look and Life magazines were sold around the world and they covered both hard hitting and puff stories. WWI and the coming new conflict; WWII. It was a time before television and major motion pictures came out (maybe) monthly. Unlike now, where it’s every Wednesday, Thursday, Friday.
The comic book filled the gap between magazine and movie. It was the first television. And it was in color at a time when most, if not all movies were still black and white. Publishers competed fiercely for sales and hire good and imaginative writers and talented artists. During the war it became a propaganda tool featuring Captain America and the Sub Mariner defeating Japanese and Nazi villains.
Now Jeff isn’t old enough to have experienced this but plenty of authors have written about the history of comics. I recently read the Joe Simon auto biography. He paints a marvelous (no pun) picture of the hustle for jobs and moves from one publisher to another that he and long time partner Jack Kirby and many others had to navigate in order to survive and thrive in that business. It’s the first book I’ve read that talks about the business and legal end of that industry as well as the creative aspect.
Jump ahead to the 1960’s and the writing and art get better. Simon and Kirby’s “splash” panel expands from the top half of one page to two. Lee Steranko alters the story panels to show time elapses, upsetting the strict division of eight or nine to twelve or more. Neil Adams comes in and brings to life Mohamed Ali boxing Superman. Joe Kubert brought back Tarzan with more vim than Hal Foster but not more vigor than Bern Hogarth. Comics have come a long way, and yes; They are serious art. They always were.
Yeah. I’m one of those examples that Jeff Smith used, growing up reading comics and everything else as well. Voracious was his term. I try to read a novel a month and sometime I’ll read three averaging 12 to 16 a year. I have not been reading comics, fearing the collecting bug, but I still pull out a graphic novel or a bound collection from what I have left and reminisce.