Week 8: Stereotype and the Ethics of Representation

Talking about stereotyping and generalizations of a culture can be such a controversial topic that most people avoid talking about it at all.  But I definitely feel that these harmful stereotypes hurt the cultures and people they exaggerate and I do not feel that they are necessary in creating these types of character designs.

Most of these stereotypes arose in a type that was centuries ago, yet they are the shorthand people still refer to.  Unfortunately, most of it has now become unconscious and people now are too worried about 'rocking the boat' or believe that this is the way things should be, since it has always been that way.  I believe that the biggest reason people use these stereotypes when creating games, animation, or comics is because they think its easier.  And to some extent, it can be-- when you're creating a game and you need a reason for the main character to go save his costar, you make her a damsel in distress.  If you're going to create a mexican character, the first thing you think of is to add a pancho and a sombrero.  Yet these aren't accurate portrayals of these people, and it hurts the people who you generalize.  Even when main characters are of an ethnic raced, they're a white-washed version of that race, so there's no mainstream view of how you represent these characters.  Looking back on my favorite childhood films, if you actually question many of the motives of our favorite disney princesses, you'll find that many of them don't have much more to them than just 'being in trouble'.

I think that it is important for people to see that these stereotypes are happening but often times it is hard to have a normal conversation about it, because it makes people feel awkward.  Most people don't like being told that they're privileged.  It's a topic that makes them feel uncomfortable because it is something that they usually didn't even realize was happening, and everybody wants to believe that their own situation was the hardest to overcome.  Nobody likes to admit that their own situation was easier, or that they were awarded chances that someone else never even knew about.

I think I have been affected by stereotypical representations, and almost to a strange extent.  I am a mexican-american woman, though I don't look like your typical mexican.  "Typical" meaning what is shown in mainstream media.  I do not wear a pancho, sombrero, or ride a donkey and my skin is as light as paper -- yet seeing a mexican seen in a comic or movie as nothing more than the funny sidekick (usually portrayed as dumb, too), this affects me.  Double that with being a mexican woman, where they're only ever portrayed as a maid, it not only affects your personal self confidence, but how others treat you.  These stereotypes and generalizations are read in comic books and people see them as truths; they think that all mexicans are immigrants who lived poor lives, all women are dumb and shallow, and etc.  A good example of this is even the Spongebob episode where they keep making jokes about squirrels and people believe it's true and treat Sandy like she's an idiot (when we all know she's the smartest character on that show).  I think it takes more research to create a character with that background but it's not impossible; stereotyping is lazy and its only perpetuating an archetype that doesn't exist and isn't true.  

Week 7: Maus

I thought Maus was a very powerful read.  The story was so complex, with many layers to it, but I felt it was a very important read and a super important piece in the history of comics.

One thing that I appreciated with Maus is the overlap of the father's story with the dynamic between the father and son thrown in.  The style that it was written in made you feel like you could've been talking to the father itself, and it also provided some context as to where the character was now and how they grew after this experience.  I feel like this also provides the ethos for the audience, as we feel like we are in the room listening to the story, asking Vladek to rewind, go back, or talk more about a certain subject.  Maus story details the harsh conditions that the father had to go through during the war and everything he had to face as a Jewish person.

I believe that the reason this is so successful is for how important this work is in retelling the events that happened.  Additionally, the characters are portrayed as simple mice or other animals, which I believe helps others see the condition as more than just one group of people or another; readers can identify the core of what was happening and because of the simplistic character designs, they are able to put themselves in the place of characters.  The character choices as animals also softens the blow of the information; Maus is a heavy story, and the author is aware of this.  By using animals, the audience is just focused on the conflicts between the different groups of people, not the specific group; it also help shed light on the fact that people were only seen as this group of people at that time, and not as individuals themselves.

Additionally, through the simplistic character designs, audiences are easily able to project themselves onto the characters and are able to truly feel the complexities of what is happening.  I felt like this piece was very similar to Barefoot Gen in terms of how powerful the content was.  Because they are so visual, it creates a longer, lasting impact to people rather than just detailing numbers of how many were injured or died.  This gives a slight visualization to the pain and suffering of a generation.  It is hard not to empathize or imagine what the main character is going through after you see such powerful images such as this:

  

I think Maus is great at detailing how people are changed from their experiences.  You see Art's father act just like Art and receive the same responses, especially when Vladek says that the stew is very tasty and his grandmother says it is not because of the limited supplies.  It is very reminiscent to Art saying the dinner Mala had prepared was great, and Vladek commenting about its faults.  Later, you see that it is really just an affect of how much he misses Anja, and you really feel for him.  The first book ends with Art calling his father a murderer, and after just reading about how he went to Auschwitz, it's a deeply moving account.  You're able to understand both sides, and you really feel the pain that they're going through.

It's in Volume 2 that you see more of what Art is going through, and see how he's been dealing with the pain that was passed down to him.

The comic was only a form for him to get these stories out.  He talks on how hard it was for Maus to have success, because now people are expecting more from him, and they're expecting answers he doesn't have.  He brings up an important point about his story-- it wasn't necessarily the best that survived.  It was just random luck.  I think that brings even more perspective to the story, because you really understand that in order to survive Auschwitz, you can to be cunning and resourceful.

I think Maus was a very powerful read, and it's not hard to imagine why it was so widespread.  The affect it has upon the reader is tremendous, and the personal story makes you feel for everyone involved.

Week 6: Underground Comics

The underground comics were super interesting for me to read and I think they really represent what was going through the 60's, as people were exploring the idea of sexuality and different drug usage.  You can see all of that shown in these comics, and the styles range from Crumb's realistic style to the more simplistic styles to even some styles that bordered on surrealism.  With the underground comics, anything went.

Since the underground comics didn't worry about getting censored, I found that they could get intensely personal.   The creators were simply looking to get their story out there, so I felt like the comics connected with the reader more.  There was no false pretense in trying to please a mass audience, it was just a form of self expression.  The underground comic movement would help broaden people's ideas of comics and what could be done with them, as they were the grounds for a lot of experimentation.  I feel like the underground comics also would've contributed to idea of graphic novels which had just started; while Eisner had talked about a personal story, the underground comics ran with this idea, and went even more personal.  The comics would talk about the creator's first time discovering experimenting with drugs or their sexuality, and it was a way to share information with others and share their own experiences.  Another thing that separated the underground comics from everyone else was the fact that most of them were meant for adults only.  Because of the age restriction, I feel like the underground comics also broke ground in establishing that the comic book was an art form that didn't have to be limited to just jokes.  It broke down a lot of the assumptions people had about how comics had to look and allowed people to be more creative with what they could do and what stories they could tell.

Week 5: Graphic Novel

The first thing I liked about Will Eisner's Contract with God was how the rainy effect he applied on his drawings was also applied on the opening text.  I think that's what ultimately separates this from a comic book.  I had never read a graphic novel, so I wasn't sure what to expect (even from an earlier version).  But I felt that the way some words were bolded or bigger or in different fonts helped you feel out the inflection of the words and I felt like it made it all the more powerful.  I felt that with the graphic novel vs just the Spirit comics, the words were designed as part of the composition instead of an afterthought.  This is a technique Craig Thompson also employs as well.  Though both artists have extremely different styles, they always incorporate the text to have the best emphasis for the message they're trying to get across.

  

Craig Thompson's example

Eisner's example

Both of these are illustrated in such a way that you feel the words rather than read them; it changes the way you read these words out loud or in your head, and that I feel is crucial to the Graphic Novel's success.

 

Specifically with A Contract With God, I thought the most powerful pages were right when Rachele died, and we see the sequences of the main character shouting against a white background to only receive a black background window in response.  After hearing the backstory of Eisner's life, you realize why this is even more touching, because you can feel the soul of what is being stated.  It established the tone for the anguish and really illustrated the fact that he felt left out or in the dark.

I related to these panels so well because I feel like everyone has had that moment in their life where they feel like shouting at life itself and you don't know why you're the one being treated unfairly.  It's a primal feeling that everyone has, and I feel like the first image above especially, with the dramatic shadows and the lines dripping down from the letters, you feel that.  The letters are almost crossed out, causing you to want to read the line with more of a texture.  You can see the pain in the characters expression and you are able to empathize with him easily, and I think that's something Eisner touches upon that everyone can relate to.  

Extra Reading Week 4: Comic Books

My experience with comic books is pretty limited.  I really think they're beautiful, but I never got into them as a child.  So for me, reading the Captain America comic book was so much fun.  The biggest surprise for me was how wordy some of the comics became.  I expected it to be more visual, bordering along the lines of The Arrival by Shaun Tan.  I can see the big appeal in them, because as I kept reading through the comic I thought "Okay, just this one chapter," and then something else would happen.  Something the Captain America comics are great at is upping the stakes-- just when you think things are bad for Captain America, there's another level, or the bad guy got away, or there's someone trapped on a ship.  Because of that element, every page is a cliffhanger of sorts, and it's hard to put down!  I feel like great movies are like this, where they layer on more and more information, so that way the audience is always interested and is always kept guessing (even though we always know Captain America will win at the end).

I also read Mary Marvel to see the difference between a female superhero and a male superhero and how their comics may differ. While Captain America was layering one thing over another, Mary Marvel's comic was a lot more singular focused-- there was one problem, and it was catching the bad guy.  It didn't have the same page-to-page gripping feeling that Captain America had.  Another thing that I thought was interesting was how these comic books portray the characters attitudes, keeping everything very specific, down to how they hit.  For example, look at the difference between Captain America hitting someone and Mary Marvel hitting someone.  Her slap seems congruent with the era it was written in, and part of me wonders if this choice was made to feminize this comic and appeal more to the women demographic.

Captain America with a really hard punch, flipping his opponent over

Mary Marvel's hand slap

I was pleased to find out though that later in the same magazine with Mary Marvel was a good quality punch by a lady though:

Freshman Freddie comic

Week 4: Comic Books

I loved looking at Carl Bark's work.  Bark's style was what I felt most familiar with, since I grew up watching the Disney films.  It was very cool to see that his drawing style is what influenced the ages to come; all of his drawings were so full of life and exaggerated that I felt as if I could trace a lot of Disney's master's styles through Carl Barks.  I feel like if you look at some of Carl Bark's drawings in Carl Barks and the Art of the Comic Book, you can even see some drawings where it looks like Glen Keane could've pulled some of his influences.  

I enjoyed how his comics were always very playful, and utilized the extremes; for example, Donald will do whatever is necessary to get what he wants, no matter the cost.  This creates a character that the audience will love based on the sole fact that they are over the top.  I found Bark's comics to be extremely different from Tintin in more ways than just the style.  Story wise, Tintin focused a lot of the panels on the journey; there would be a lot of mini problems that would happen along the way, and often were believable problems.  It also played more with word gags, where as Bark's comic was a lot more visual and each problem (and solution) was pushed to the extreme.  I personally liked the content of Bark's more, as it was more playful and you knew that the worst was going to happen, whereas TinTin played it very safe at times.