1) The Relationship Between Text and Image
One of the first things that struck me about Fun Home was how dominant
the text was in comparison to the illustration. There’s not really more of it (word-count-wise)
than there was in the other stuff we’ve read, but Bechdel’s strong narrative
voice really upstages her drawings a lot of the time (not a
bad thing).
The relationship between the text (especially the narration) and the
images becomes a really important part of Bechdel’s narrative strategy. One
aspect of this that I think is particularly interesting is described by the
concept of anchorage and relay, coined by Roland Barthes in his 1964 essay,
‘The Rhetoric of the Image’. (A pretty good summary can be found here http://tracesofthereal.com/2009/12/21/the-rhetoric-of-the-image-roland-barthes-1977/).
Barthes was looking at pictorial advertisements and analyzing the
visual arguments they were making (but I think it’s a pretty clean translation
to comics as well). For images, he wrote about the difference between denotative and connotative meanings. For the text, he identified two major roles
that it could play: anchorage, which solidified the expected meaning of the
associated image; and relay, which added different meanings or challenged the
original meaning of the associated image (or vice versa).
Bechdel is using both strategies here with her narration, and
I’ve included an example of each below.
 |
| Anchorage (Text solidifies the meaning of the image) |
 |
| Relay (Text challenges the original meaning of the image) |
How do you think Bechdel is playing on the relationship between text
and image in Fun Home? What does this relationship look like in a ‘traditional’
comic? What are the limits and opportunities of this relationship?
2) Allusion and Comics as Literature
The other thing that really stood out to me about Fun Home was the
expert use of allusion and reference, mostly to works from the Western literary
canon. While obviously Bechdel weaves these references into excellent metaphors
and poetic language, it did strike me as a bit strange. She is working the
comics medium, so why reference so heavily to a totally different medium? Is
she trying to ‘legitimize’ her comics work by making these references? Why not
reference previous comics and/or graphic memoirs? Is there even a comics canon
worth referencing?
I read that it took the author 7 years to create 'Fun Home' because of her artistic process. She took photographs of herself in various poses in order to create her characters. That is perhaps part of the allusion and reference that Max is talking about. It isn't just the literary use of canon and language that creates these metaphors. The art plays a large part in showcasing the themes in sexual orientation, gender roles and suicide. The art also helps in playing out the theme of the author's character being butch to her father being a sissy. Her confusion/fear compared to her father's inappropriate behavior and actions with babysitters and students and other homosexual relations.
ReplyDeleteI think that, perhaps more than some of the other works we've read, Bechdal really strives to have the text and art hold equal weight in the framework of the novel. If Maus could be considered more literary, and something like Incognegro more visual, Fun Home attempts to keep a balance between which of the two elements are seen as being more dominant. The structure of her layouts exhibits this concept: big, open panels, with text that often sits in its own place in the gutter. Both elements of the comic - the text and the art - are given their own space so as not to come into conflict or overshadow one-another.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of her allusions, I'm not sure that there's a "message" beyond "these are the things that I have come to be familiar with." As we go through our lives we pick up bits and pieces of information that we then fold into our personal passions, hobbies, and general outlook on life. There aren't any clear-cut dividers between what we immerse ourselves and and what we do; it all tends to just blur together. Here, Bechdel is making these kinds of references because they occupy a place of familiarity for her, and she's telling the story the way that she can best convey. Those allusions and references are part of her language, in a way.
ReplyDeleteI think that Bechdel uses the image to merely give the reader an impression of the subjects, which are given mostly in the text. For the most part, the images don't tell the story as much as the text, but merely provide the reader with the impression Bechdel wishes to convey. Many of the images even consist of nothing but text, such as her father's letters, actual books, and dictionary entries. It seems that words and literature had a great effect of her father, and so the emphasis is placed on them.
I found Bechdel's allusions to literature to be astonishing. I was truly impressed with the way in which she used her father's favorite books to show the parallel's between those books and her family and her life. I don't think that she is trying to "legitimize" her comics by referring to classical books. Rather, I think that she is trying to explain the powerful effect this books had on her father and her life. She makes the interesting point that often, we become what we read. The powerful influence that a book can have on us is almost just as powerful as the influence of a family. Thus the only reason she doesn't reference to other comics is because of her father's lack of interest for the medium.
I think that these two separate questions really tie in together quite tightly, and it really opened up a whole new way of writing for her in this story. The way she tied in the text (a LOT of which focused on different literature) to her images (which most of the time was just focusing on the scene that was being portrayed) caused some of the most intense examples of anchorage and relay that I've experienced, possibly due to the subject matter. The masterful way that she weaves the literature that her father loved so much into such beautiful metaphors within her story really showed a lot about both her character and that of her father. It adds feeling to the story (as there really just isn't much emotion going on within the context of just the images) and it adds depth to the characters, so you can have a greater understand of the way they are and the way they interact with/are affected by each other.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I agree with Sebastian. Legitimizing her story has nothing to do with her use of the different literary references she used in her story, and everything to do with who her father was and the things he loved. Every single time she started comparing things in her life to a book, it was almost always prefaced by her talking about how her father loved that book.
I feel strongly like Bechdel wanted to focus more on her words in this story, and have the art as a way to further express the words she was trying to say. This comic has felt the most like a traditional novel in the way that's it read. Not so much in the structure between the narrative, but each "text box", as it were, has had a much higher narrative quality, whatever that means. It's just felt like something you would naturally read in a novel. Everything from her use of actual novels in the story, to her general higher plane of vocabulary and deeper thought that she delves into in this story makes it feel like she is wanting to take the form of novel very seriously, even in it's graphic content. Because it is a graphic novel, and NOVEL is a 50% of that. I think she lets the words take a lot of weight in this novel, especially just by the way she bounces around in the story. There isn't a strong sense of linear plot. We are constantly bouncing back and forth between childhood, teenage years, adulthood, etc. And I think she did this because she wanted to focus so strongly on what it was she was saying, and tell the story well, that the linear can kind of take a second fiddle. The art, more than taking a second fiddle, just is more than to reinforce what it is she has to say. But I don't think it's her strongest point. I think it's more of an accent, as it were. Beautifully done though.
ReplyDeleteEven though comics/graphic novels are gaining aplomb, they aren't considered high forms of literature I don't think. And she seemed to want to give this a feel of that. But she couldn't really represent it with other comics, so I think she chose to have it paired side by side with lots of literature, both just in appearance, and also in deep references. Not to legitimize, necessarily, but to put up as a comparison, and promote similarities.
It’s almost like reading a traditional book just with images under every sentence. It seems like Bechdel has added images to the texts instead of adding text to the images. Controlling the picture instead of letting it taking over.
ReplyDeleteThis style could be considered to be more human-like thought process. Because when you read or someone is telling a story you get the words first then the image. She’s probably trying to keep it as close to the actual events that happened.
The book does have a strange style to it. It just as images underneath every sentence that narrates that image. It's a very simple style, but she probably meant to do that so as to make the narration more effective. This is a style that I might want to try if I start comic design.
ReplyDeleteBut it's not just the text that makes the story unique, it is also the art style of the comic. When I first saw this comic, I immediately thought that the main character was a boy and not a girl. Bechdel probably used this kind of art style to address the issue commonly played with gender and sexuality. And this style of art is an excellent way to address that said issue.
Bechdel is using wordplay in a very innovative manner. Many authors have actions that contradict their description or subtext, but because this is a graphic novel, she is able to actually show this. This wordplay makes the novel a far more interesting read because the text and the artwork sometimes seem to contradict each other to the point that it can take several reads of a page to actually understand the interaction.
ReplyDeleteAs for the allusions, I was intrigued by those. I think she did it not to legitimize her own work, but to show how hard she worked to understand her parents, particularly her father. Both of her parents were English teachers, and were clearly very well read. But neither of them were very communicative, especially when it came to difficult issues. Reading some of the texts they read frequently was a logical way for her, and for the reader, to start understanding her parents.
I think Bechdel is definitely thinking more as a director than a writer/illustrator. She is planning out the characters' placements, movements, etc. rather than just drawing what was happening at the time and describing it. All or most of the drawings in this novel are confined to the boxes we associate with comics, but I find myself reading this book as if if were a film being shown to me. Each panel is a concept drawing for the film and I can fill in the rest of them with how the actors would be moving and where. It's really beautifully done in this respect. Often in films, the character building/introduction portion is based heavily on words rather than just images. Typically I think of comics as having mostly pictures, a little narration, and quotes that really tell the story; here, Bechdel tells the story through words and images, with a small amount of quotes to add a little more detail. Bechdel, I'm sure, lived in a relatively quiet home; her parents never look happy together and her father basically would just contact her to be his handyman. So It is fair to expect a lot of narration and inner thoughts of the narrator to balance off the images.
ReplyDeleteBechdel seems to want to emphasize that although there was not much going on in her life, she had big thoughts and dreams. She wants to show the audience that there is more than meets the eye throughout her childhood. I think it would be unfair to only reference her same medium because that sticks her somewhere and we are quickly learning that she is hunting for an escape.
I enjoy the references she makes to the more traditional literary canon. I would like to try reading it without the images, to see how if the writing could stand alone and still convey the same meanings. The panels seem more to illustrate the story more than drive it. The illustrations do add deeper or double meaning to the text alone, but her strong writing style really seems to push the plot. I didn’t necessarily notice if this was an attempt to bridge the two genres, but the style seems very natural since the main character’s father is very artistic. The use of sketched illustrations and “high brow” language seem to serve as a connection between artistic father and young daughter.
ReplyDeleteIt is so refreshing to have a novel that is balanced so equally between imagery and text. Bechdel had me checking the dictionary more than once to understand her graphic memoir. If anything I would say that her narrative and writing may have edged out her illustrations. The illustrations seem to supplement the tale rather then be a detractor. None of the panels are filled with enough movement or flair to take away from the writing. I like how Mike pointed out that many graphic novels are not considered to be a part of "high literature" and she is attempting to bridge that gap. I think this is very true as she is definitely a prolific writer. I was most interested in how she was able dice up the plot timeline so frequently and yet still get her point across.
ReplyDeleteI feel I'm turning into the grouchy old man that yells at kids to get off my lawn and lighten up a bit when it comes to analyzing literature (in this regards, I feel like I'm a grumpy old retired high school English teacher).
ReplyDeleteAs for referencing another medium? Clearly, her father connected with literature. This is why Bechdel references such classic works. I wholeheartedly believe if her dad was into, say, foreign films the author would have included more references to - you guessed it - foreign film. Furthermore, I come away with a sense that by referencing the pieces of literature, Alison is finding connection and meaning to her father.
No. No. No. I don't find the use of literary references a way to legitimize her work. I see the story as a deeply personal one, and can't imagine the author using "Fun Home" with the intention of legitimizing he medium. Again, the references come organically and serve a purpose. If the dad was an avid comic book reader I'm 100% sure Bechdel would have referenced comics.
I will concede this; as grouchy as I feel I think Bechdel herself is in some ways over-analyzing literature in "Fun Home" to find deeper understanding and answers. She seems to stretch from time to time; trying to find clues as o why here father may have committed suicide. I find this realistc and heartbreaking.
Now, Get Off My Lawn!
The art and text work effectively with each other due to their shifting in tone. Art sometimes takes precedent over the text and vice versa. Yet within each there is another changing of pace. Sometimes the text was objective and straight to the point. While at other moments it was emotional and subjective. Just as the art had this very unique toonish feel, it would shift, specifically in the instance of photographs, the art would gain a harsh upgrade toward a more realistic art style.
ReplyDeleteBechdel's references allow for more description of her life, and embrace a whole wealth of information that surpasses one specific medium. Why narrow her scope of information when she can perfectly and purposefully use references from relevant sources outside her medium? She investigated beyond just her own story, but made connections to these other stories, and her own life. Plus the impact these writings had on her family, and how they influenced the things that have happened in her life. Plus, novels, comics, stories in general, have this sense of connection. Where the viewer, reader, listener finds themselves within the story. Bechdel not only explores that notion but creates plausible answers and outcomes from those stories to support her theories.