Arguing Comics: Literary Masters on a Popular Medium (Studies in Popular Culture (Paperback))

! Read ^ Arguing Comics: Literary Masters on a Popular Medium (Studies in Popular Culture (Paperback)) by Brand: University Press of Mississippi ✓ eBook or Kindle ePUB. Arguing Comics: Literary Masters on a Popular Medium (Studies in Popular Culture (Paperback)) cummings, who championed George Herrimans Krazy Kat, to Irving Howe, who fretted about Harold Grays Little Orphan Annie, this volume shows that comics have provided a key battleground in the culture wars for over a century. e. When Art Spiegelmans Maus-a two-part graphic novel about the Holocaust-won a Pulitzer Prize in 1992, comics scholarship grew increasingly popular and notable. Arguing Comics: Literary Masters on a Popular Medium brings together nearly two doz

Arguing Comics: Literary Masters on a Popular Medium (Studies in Popular Culture (Paperback))

Author :
Rating : 4.90 (991 Votes)
Asin : 1578066875
Format Type : paperback
Number of Pages : 208 Pages
Publish Date : 2013-09-03
Language : English

DESCRIPTION:

All rights reserved. cummings. Most of the earliest address comics more as social phenomenon than as art form--an approach that became more pronounced in the 1950s, when worries escalated over the effects of crime and horror comic books on youngsters. Gordon FlaggCopyright © American Library Association. Other notable pieces include Dorothy Parker's "mash note" to Crockett Johnson's Barnaby, Delmore Schwartz's condemnation of Classics Illustrated, Irving Howe's indictment of comics (and mass culture in general), Marshall McLuha

cummings, who championed George Herriman's Krazy Kat, to Irving Howe, who fretted about Harold Gray's Little Orphan Annie, this volume shows that comics have provided a key battleground in the culture wars for over a century. e. When Art Spiegelman's Maus-a two-part graphic novel about the Holocaust-won a Pulitzer Prize in 1992, comics scholarship grew increasingly popular and notable. Arguing Comics: Literary Masters on a Popular Medium brings together nearly two dozen essays by major writers and intellectuals who analyzed, embraced, and even attacked comic strips and comic books in the period between the turn of the century and the 1960s. The rise of "serious" comics has generated growing levels of interest as scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals continue to explore the history, aesthetics, and semiotics of the comics medium.Yet those who write about the comics often assume analysis of the medium didn't begin until the cultural studies movement was underway. From e. With substantive essays by Umberto Eco, Marshall McLuhan, Leslie Fiedler, Gilbert Seldes, Dorothy Parker, Irving Howe, Delmore Schwartz, an

Clifford said Where's the proofreader?. This interesting collection of essays on the historical reception of comics by intellectuals is marred by a inexcusable number of typos and print errors. University Press of Mississippi should be applauded for all the titles it has published on comics scholarship, but the editorial sloppiness in this title is a disservice to the reader and the field.. Bob Barr said The Book Is Not About What It Seems To Be. The book is interesting, but it demonstrates one important point that most of us have known for a long time anyway: that the so--called "intellectuals" must justify their enjoyment of any popular medium and write about it as if they were columnists for National Geographic detailing the bizarre folk rites of the Ugga Bugga village in Lower East Armpit.There is a special amused and self--conscious disdain that the smart--guy "keepers of the flame" of Western Civ. bring with them to the discussion of the best parts of pop culture: they write in that aggravating smug/condescending voice and wrap their superiority up in a fog of twenty--five cen. Impressive trawl Apart from the eye-popping howler 33 words in (inveigle for inveigh) this looks to be a thoroughly solid, dependable collection and foundational text for any student of comics who does other than look at the pictures. Such names! (Clement Greenberg for instance, somewhat disparaging Sir David Low, for many the foremost political cartoonist of the age. Low no Daumier? Daumier's no Low - is he even Tenniel?) What's interesting is that the pictures still speak to (some of) us in a way that these mannered voices, be they never so soigné, frequently don't. Though I warm to Leslie Fiedler's gentle advocacy of this - still! - 'niche' medium