gordon 1991 comic art history ma us

8/21/2019 Gordon 1991 Comic Art History Ma Us

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gordon-1991-comic-art-history-ma-us 1/6

But Seriously, Folks . . . :

Comic Art and

History

IAN

GORDON

University of Rochester

History of the Comic Strip: Vol. 2, The Nineteenth Century. By David

Kunzle. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990. xx and 391 pages.

$100.00.

Comic Books as History:

The

Narrative Art of Jack Jackson,

Art

Spie-

gelman, and Harvey Pekar. By Joseph Witek. Jackson: University Press

of

Mississippi, 1989.

xiv and

164 pages. $30.00 cloth, $14.95 paper.

THESE TWO WORKS, SO DIFFERENT IN STYLE AND CONTENT, ARE UNITED

by

the

desire to bring academic respectability to graphic

narrative

(Kun-

zle) or sequential art (Witek). The difference between the works can

be gauged by the lack of a common term to describe their subject. For

Kunzle graphic narrative is a term that includes illustrated broadsheets

from as early as the fifteenth century and the comic strips of the twentieth

century. Sequential

art

is

also

an inclusive

term, although

Witek confines

its

usage to recent work. The term has, according to Witek, the advantage

of

avoiding

the

generic

connotations

of

the

word comic

and

sidestepping

associations with the burlesque and the ridiculous (6).

But as Kunzle's exhaustive

study

of the antecedents of

comic

strips

demonstrates,

it is

the

link

with

the

comic

that

distinguishes

this

particular

form of artistic

expression.

His

book

provides

the historical

Ian

Gordon

s

finishing Ph.D. thesis

n

history

n

comic

art

n

American

ulture t

the

University

of Rochester. He

is

the

1990/91

Swann Foundation or

Caricature

and

CartoonDissertationellow.

American Quarterly, Vol. 43, No.

2

(June 1991) C 1991

American

Studies

Association

341

in: American Quarterly, 43:2(Jun., 1991), pp. 341-346



342 AMERICAN

QUARTERLY

perspective,andsome

methodological onstructs,

necessary o understand

the

production

nd cultural

operation

of the

comic

art

form

in

twentieth-

century

America.

Witek's

study,

which

is not without

merit, could

have

been

strengthened y

incorporating

ome of Kunzle's discoveries

about

the structure f the artform. This is not an unfairchargeagainstWitek

as

Kunzle's work underreview

here

is

the

secondvolume

in a

projected

three-part

tudy.

Kunzle's first volume

History of

the

Comic Strip:

Vol. 1,

The

Early

Comic

Strip,published

n

1973,

contained

an

accountof the crucial

rans-

formation

n

graphicnarrative

n late

eighteenth

centuryEngland;

the

stylistic revolutionn populargraphicartknown as caricature Kunzle,

Berkeley, 1973, 1).

Kunzle

demonstratedhatbefore

Hogarth ntroduced

a

comic element n graphic

narrative uring he eighteenth

entury,

t

was

primarily

oncerned

with

religious,moral,

and

political hemesof

a

didactic

or

propagandistic

ature.The

narrative

n

Hogarth's anels

was

also

easier

to follow than n

earlier,

more

static, graphic

narrative.But

Hogarth

was

no caricaturist.

Nor

did he

use

speechballoons,

contrary o

the view held

by manycomicarthistorians.Caricature, methodof capturing person's

essential

character

y

the

exaggeration

f features

n a

loose

line

drawing,

entered he

public

realm

of

European rt ate

in

the eighteenth

entury.

t

lent

itself

to political

commentary

nd to a new

style

of narrativeiction:

the comic

strip. RodolpheTopffer

(1799-1846)

undertook

he

first

sus-

tained work

in

the

new

medium

of

the

comic strip,

and

History of

the

Comic Strip: Vol. 2, The Nineteenth Century

openswith a discussionof

his

work.

Kunzleargues hatTopffer

and those who followed

him, most notably

Cham

(Charles-Henri-Amedee

e

Noe),

Leonce

Petit,

AdolpheWillette,

andWilhelm

Busch, effecteda

profound hange

n

graphicnarrative.They

produced omic

strips

that

aimed to entertain.The works presentednot

the

facile comic

stripofferingsone

so often

encounters

n

the late

twentieth

century,butextended ales, gatheredn albums, hataddressed heemerg-

ing

bourgeois

order of

Europe.

For instance, between 1830 and

1846,

Topffer ampooned he

pretensions f

the

petite

bourgeoisieon the make,

parodied

cientific

research,

and n his final

work,

derided

would-be

revo-

lutionists. To tell

these stories,

Tdpffer and the others

developed

new

graphic

arrative

echniques.

These ncludeddried

penetching

and

stunning

montagesequences n whichthe imagescut back andforthbetweenpro-

tagonists,

or

ranged

over movement

hrough

ime and

space.

Kunzle's

detailedaccount

of

the

Europeandevelopment

of

the

comic



BUT

SERIOUSLY,FOLKS..

.

343

strip s relevant o an

American tudies

audiencebecausedespite he

unique

and

specificallyAmericanhumorous

radition isplayed

n

early

Amer-

ican comic strips 5),

theirform, and

indeedtheircontent,

owed muchto

the

earlierEuropean

work. Beyond acknowledging hat

Rudolph

Dirks

based TheKatzenjammerKids on Wilhelm Busch's comic albumMax und

Moritz,historianseldomfindany direct

Europeannfluenceon American

comic strips. But Kunzle's

tale of Cham'sM. Barnabe

Gogo (published

in

1841) should cause

some speculation

as both the title and

story bring

Billy DeBeck, the creatorof the

classic Americancomic

strip Barney

Google (now Snuffy

Smith), to

mind.2 M.

Barnabe Gogo

was

the account

of a young painterdedicated o a career n high artwho madea living as

a

caricaturist ecause

the Salon rejectedhis work. The

artisteventually

met his

deathat the

handsof the verybourgeoisiehe

caricatured.DeBeck

studied

at the Chicago

Academyof Fine Arts

with the intent

of producing

works on par with

Rembrandt's.To

supporthimself he

sold caricatures

to

Chicagonewspapers.Eventually

William

Randolph

Hearst's

King

Fea-

tures

Syndicate

ontracted

im

to

produce

BarneyGoogle.

Apart

romthe

similarity etweenGogo'slife andDeBeck's earlycareer,Gogo andGoo-

gle

shared

a

commonnature:Gogois French

or mug or sucker.

Barney

Google

was

often

taken

or

a

mug

in

his

earlydays.

Kunzledoes

not

make

a

connectionbetweenGogo and Google and

the similarity

may simplybe

coincidence,

but it

suggests

a link

between

European

nd

American omic

art

that needs

investigation.PerhapsKunzlewill tackle

the job in his

promised hirdvolume on Americancomic strips.

Witek's

studyfocuses on comicbooksand

only

deals with

comic

strips

in

order

o note the different ultural

tatus,

situation

n the

marketplace,

and

modesof reception hat

separate

hese

two formsof comic

art.Witek's

project

has

two

sides.

First,

he

argues hatcomicbooks

are an

appropriate

medium

or

new

visions

of

American

istory

hat

ell thestoriesof otherwise

marginalized eople.

Second,

n

order o

support

is first

argument,

Witek

posesand makesreference o anaestheticof comicart. Thebook consists

of

an

interplay

etween hese two

themes. But the

mainthrust

of the

work

is

the

attempt

o establish the

credentials

of

Jackson,

Spiegelman,

and

Pekaras

historians.

Witekpresentshe threeartists

as major ontributorso

a

body

of

work

in

the

comic book form

thathas

brokenwith

traditional

ormulas

while

exploitingthe rich formalandthematicheritageof the medium (3-4).

Witek

arguesthat

before

the

1970s,

attempts

o tell fact-basedstories

through

omics were as

dry

as

dust.

The E.

C. comics edited

by Harvey



344 AMERICAN

QUARTERLY

Kurtzmann theearly 1950s werea rare

exception.

But

these comic books

nevermade

moneyandwerediscontinued

hortlyafterKurtzmaneft them

to

take

chargeof

the parodycomic book Mad.

E.

C.

comics

also

suffered

from Fredric

Wertham's ampaigndirectedat the supposed ll effectsof

comic books on America'syouth. Witekpointsto theironyof Wertham's

campaign

and

thesubsequent

stablishment

f

a

Comics Code

Authority,

which,

in

leachingout any contentious ubjectmatter, nsured hatcomic

books

remained,

or the most

part,

ill

crafted

pap

that

only

children

read (49). This

situation

was

only remedied

n

the late 1960s

and

early

1970s, when a

new generation f artistsbroke

out of the industry's on-

straintsand publishedcomixs-undergroundcomic books dealing with

sex, drugs,

and

rock n'roll.

The

freedomof

comixs liberated

artists

who

experimented ithbothcontent

and

orm.Comixs

were

angry,contentious,

and

vibrant.It

was in

comixs

that

Jackson,Spiegelman,

and Pekar

first

incorporated

istory

n

theirworks.

Jack

Jackson

writes

comic book historiesof the AmericanSouthwest

thatdeal

with

marginalized

Native Americanand

Hispanic igures.

Witek

laudsJackson or both his refiguration f frontierhistoryandhis implied

notion

of

history-or historical orces-as the

aggregateof

individual

human

behavior(65).3 Witek's one

complaint

s

that Jackson'srecent

bookLos

Tejanos,

which

recounts he

storyof

Juan

Seguinwho at different

times

fought for

Texan

independence rom

Mexico and Mexican inde-

pendence from

Napoleon

III's

puppet

Maximilian,

resembles the

dry,

factual omicbookof the1950s. Witek s willingto overlook hisweakness

because of

the

subject

matter

and

becausehe

regardsJackson'swork

as

insistingupon

the validityof the comic book as a

historicalmedium.But

Jackson's ecent

books

seem

to undercutWitek's

thesis.

The

striking hing

aboutJackson's

work is

his

use of

anachronistic peech styles to convey

the

differencebetween

reality

and

perception.But

his

art seems

flat com-

paredto

his

undergroundomix days. In place of comic caricature s a

narrative evice, he nowusesanhistoricalportrait tyle. Jacksonhas toned

down his

artto reach

a

wider

audience,

and

in

doing so,

he has

lost some

of the

advantage

f comic

art

as

a

medium.This

loss relatesto Witek's

definition

of

the art form as

sequential

art.

Both Jackson

and

Witek

seem

to think

hatcomicbooks

need

to lose some

of

their comic

aspects

before they can

deal

with

serioussubjects

before a wide

audience.

This undercurrentn Witek's analysiscontradicts is treatment f Art

Spiegelman's

Maus,

a

comic book that

tells the

story

of the Holocaust

by

positing

Jews as mice and Nazis as

cats.

It is

also the

story

of

Art



BUT SERIOUSLY,

FOLKS..

. 345

Spiegelman's elationshipwith his father,

a

Holocaust

survivor.Spiegel-

man

insists, and Witek concurs, that Maus managesto be

an

authentic

Holocaust arrative,

nd

one thatavoidssentimentality

ecauseof

its

comic

stylization.Witek ties the reader'sability to comprehend

he anthropo-

morphic ale to familiaritywith funnyanimal comic books.He stresses

the traditionof ignoringthe animalnatureof the

characters

n

favor of

treating hem as humanbeings. But this connection eems

too simplistic.

Witek

regardsSpiegelman'suse of animalcharacters s a

metaphorical

statement.But Spiegelman's ale is more allegorical han

metaphorical.

Mausposits

a

relationship etweenNazis andJews similar o thatbetween

catsandmice and vice versa. The Nazi/Cats n Maus arenot human; hey

are cats who speak and dress like humanbeings.

Likewise the Jews

are

depictedas mice. Spiegelman resentsus with a world

urnedupsidedown

where the Nazi/Cats orce people, the Jews, to live like

mice simply to

survive.

The extension of

this

anthropomorphictate to

Spiegelman's

relationwith his fathersuggeststhe long-term

psychological ffect of the

Holocaust.

Further, piegelman's

workrelates

not only

to

funny

animal

comicsbut alsoto a Europeanopsy-turvyraditionnwhich, amongother

things,

human

beingsacquire

nimal

haracteristics.

unzle's

Historywith

its detailedaccountof the relationship etweengraphic

narrative ndEur-

opean

traditions

would

have

providedWitek with

a

useful

approach o

explore

further

he complexityof Maus.

Witek's final

chaptercelebratesHarvey Pekar's AmericanSplendor

series.AmericanSplendors an annualcomic book writtenby Pekarand

illustrated y a varietyof artists.It depictsepisodes from Pekar's ife as

a

filing clerk

in a

Clevelandhospital.

Witek

hails

it

as

collapsing

the

difference

betweenpublic

and

privatehistory

and as

an

evocation

of

the

inescapable nterconnections etween [sic] humanbeings (153). Witek

dismisses

the notionthat

this

self-absorbed

work

may

be

banal

or narcis-

sistic because of its commitment o realism. He never questionsPekar's

inability o conceive of humanrelationsexcept as theyapplyto himself.

Other

people'sexperiences nly

achieve

mportance

s

they

relate o

Pekar.

Witek does not consider he

possibility

hat

Pekar's

realism,

or all

its

humorand

nsight nto

human

relations,may

be

symptomatic

f

a

culture

of

narcissism.

In

general

Witek

backs

away

from

placing

comic books

in

a broad

cultural ontext. Forinstance,whendiscussingLos Tejanos,he says that

his

discussion

cannothope to

deal with

all

the

narrative,

istoriographic,

and

culturalssuesraised

by [the]complex

and

unusualwork

87).

Instead



346

AMERICAN

UARTERLY

he favors

description of the

comic art

techniques

Jackson

employs

to

determine

how the

comic book functions

to create a historical

narrative

(87).

Jackson's

technique as

outlined by

Witek is to

place

incidents

in

a

contiguous framework and

then,

literally,

draw a

common

conclusion.

Witek says that Jackson presents a complex historical process in a way

only

comic

books can do

(90).

And

this

way

shows

visually

the

conflict

that words

can

only

describe

(88).

Witek

collapses

the distinction between

narrativeand

history

and

favors the

story

over

analysis.

To

my

mind

history

shows more than

how particular

actions result in

specific

outcomes;

it

explains

why.

If

Jackson's comic books

achieve this result

for

Witek,

then

he needs to examine the narrative,historiographic, and culturalissues they

raise

because these

ingredients account for

Witek's ability to

comprehend

history from the

comic

book.

David

Kunzle's

History sets a

standard for discussion and

analysis of

the

comic art form. He

not

only

recounts the

technical and

stylistic

de-

velopment

of the form but

sets

it

within the

cultural matrix

of nineteenth-

century

Europe. Witek's book raises the

possibility

that

comic books

may

transcendtheir formulaic natureand produce a new literarymedium. His

analysis of

the

potential

of

that

medium has a

number of

weaknesses,

but

it

is

at

least

suggestive

of the

work

that needs

to be done

to

develop

an

aesthetic

of comic books.

These works taken

together

indicate

that the

comic

artform in the

United States

may,

after

a

century

of mass

acceptance,

be

about to receive

the critical

attention it deserves.

NOTES

1.

See,

for instance, Martin

Sheridan,Comics and

Their

Creators

(Boston,

1942),

16.

2. Chammay have borrowed he title from an earliernarrativeby Daumierentitled

Misaventures et

ddsappointements

e Mr

Gogo. AnotherGogo character

appeared

n

France in

1858.

See

Kunzle, History of

the Comic

Strip: Vol.

2, 87 and

146.

3.

Witek's

general

conceptionof

history

stressestheimportance f

individual

actions

and

choices.

But

an

unresolved tension

creeps

into

his

work

when

he

deploys

terms

such as

the causal chain of

history (20),

the

impersonalobjects of

war

to whom

thingshappen

30),

and

historical orces

(65) without

anchoring

hem

in his

analysis.

Is there a

process

involved in the

aggregateof individual

choices

becoming historical

forces,

or are

they

simply equivalent?

Do the

comic books under discussion

address

this question?

gordon 1991 comic art history ma us

Documents