Week 3 - Little Nemo + Other Comics
I love the illustrations in Little Nemo. It’s so beautiful and extremely unique. It is a visual trip. I like how we, the readers, get to experience Nemo’s world with the same awe as the characters do. I feel like a lot of Japanese comic artists would find McCay’s work inspirational, as they seem to place a lot of importance on world-building. I think a disappointing aspect of his work is that he always works in wide shots. It’s rare to see any of the environments up close. My relationship with these characters feels impersonal. I want to feel like I’m right next to these characters. I don’t want to feel like I’m on the sidelines all the time. The disadvantage is that the characters often blend into the environment. Whenever a character causes a commotion, I kind of look past it because the characters themselves don’t serve as a focal point. Things just happen, but you aren’t impacted as strongly due to the inflexibility of the compositions. I think Winsor McCay really just wanted an excuse to flex his illustration skills somewhere and be recognized for it (I’m not complaining, though).
What defines Krazy Kat is its quirky dialogue, though I don’t think Krazy Kat is a good comic. I can’t even enjoy it because I can’t comprehend what the characters are saying at all. Even after deciphering what’s being said, I think the delivery of the jokes is really bland. A teacher told me that a good story can be understood without dialogue, and if there is dialogue, it should enhance what is being shown. Contrary, there are comics like Dilbert, where the characters are merely props for dialogue. But, Dilbert works because it’s written in a relatable context; the office (and it’s written in Standard English). Maybe I just don’t get Krazy Kat, but I just don’t know how I’m supposed to relate to an outlaw who throws bricks.
What defines Krazy Kat is its quirky dialogue, though I don’t think Krazy Kat is a good comic. I can’t even enjoy it because I can’t comprehend what the characters are saying at all. Even after deciphering what’s being said, I think the delivery of the jokes is really bland. A teacher told me that a good story can be understood without dialogue, and if there is dialogue, it should enhance what is being shown. Contrary, there are comics like Dilbert, where the characters are merely props for dialogue. But, Dilbert works because it’s written in a relatable context; the office (and it’s written in Standard English). Maybe I just don’t get Krazy Kat, but I just don’t know how I’m supposed to relate to an outlaw who throws bricks.
Comments
Post a Comment