Many people like myself feel traditional literature is the
above all, end all of literature. We like words and the infinite worlds that
they create not limited or hindered by a picture made of the authors
interpretation. Graphic novels combine the elements of traditional literature
and pictures to better do something for the reader. What exactly I don’t
understand. I considered them limiting and unnecessary. There is a book that
made me question my outlook. Shaun tan’s “The Arrival” is a book without words.
It tells a story without a word spoken. Yet, when you read it and analyze the
pictures of interactions between characters you can hear words spoken by them.
It could be argued that this book requires just as much imagination as a
traditional book. This is of course a weird comparison because each is missing
an element from what is called a graphic novel. I wonder why the separation is
appealing to me and not the combination. I think it is the thought I’m forced
to put into it when they are separate. I enjoyed creating my own environments
or imagining the conversations between people. Graphic novels take that imagination
out of it. I like reading them because they are quick, easy to read, and they
put all the readers of the books on an equal level. The readers don’t have to
interpret the scene or setting and so are more able to focus on meaning and
content. In “American Born Chinese” we find that the moral is be true to what
you are. Would we be hindered if the story were just pictures or words? Would
the story still make sense or are the words and pictures in combination necessary
to keep the reader on track? The answer is all dependent on the author’s proficiency
of writing or illustrating. I find some scenes from “American Born Chinese”
need words to explain what’s going on, while others especially the scenes with
the monkey king I find I could make most of it out without words.
