With the fallout of Vietnam, the continuing threat of mutually assured destruction, and other socio-political issues spilling over from the 70s into the 80s a darker tone in comics was inevitable. But that is just the backdrop for comics. Comics had to adapt their content for the direct market. Their readership was aging, and so, they had to adapt the content to reflect their aging readers. Inevitably, the comics grew darker. They became more violent. They grew more socially and politically aware of the world and would comment and parody it. Because of the aging readership, comics had to grow and adapt. So not only did they become darker, they became more self-referential, commenting on comics history and past issues. Instead of broadening their audience, comics selected and reduced their audience, focusing on readers that they already had.
To begin with, I really do like the idea of reading a comic about comics. I think it's a great idea and it's very well executed. As I was reading the first two chapters, I was surprised at how many examples there were of art in recent (and ancient, in some cases) history that are variations of "sequential visual art" and thus the foundations of modern comics. I'd never even thought about it before and it was hard to believe how many different kinds there were. I also love all the discussion about how our human brains automatically interpret certain images in a specific way, how we see others constantly but we identify ourselves when we look at cartoons, and how inanimate objects automatically becomes extensions of our bodies. The pyramid of styles was very interesting too as a way to conceptualize and almost graph or "place" a specific art style in comics. In Comic Book Nation , I enjoyed reading about the evolution of early comics from "funnies...
Comments