Please describe the links, if any, between comics journalism and literary journalism. Is it possible to consider comics journalism a subgenre of literary journalism? Why or why not? Your response is due prior to class on Monday, May 3.
With literary journalism, the writer only has their words to rely on in order to create meaning for the reader. But, with comics journalism, there is the opportunity to literally create the image you want your reader to see, or be a part of.
It goes a step beyond using feeling as fact. The whole story, in comics journalism, relies on your perception of events, psychically and physically, not only do you have to interpret feelings, but you must draw the scenes you were apart of.
I think it’s possible to consider comics journalism a sort of sub-genre of literary journalism, but I think for a broader majority of people, it might be harder to accept as “factual news.”
Christmas with Karadzic is a comic that provides a social commentary. Part of the story contrasts the facts of Karadzic and his crimes in leading a mass genocide with the images of him praying at Christmas day mass, as Sacco grapples with trying to feel the anger and resentment he knows he holds towards this man, but can’t seem to find in that moment. One of the most significant image/textual contrast I found was on the last page of this story, where he’s attending Christmas dinner with his landlady, Rada and he is describing how the war has affected the specific people in that room and the pictures are of them hugging and kissing loved ones and sharing a meal as he’s telling us the number of total deaths. It reminded me of Martha Gellhorn’s piece “The Third Winter is the Hardest.” Her straightforward passages are similar to the straightforward scenes drawn by Sacco, and the parenthetical, reflective passages are the bubbled-off text of what’s going on inside his head.
I think the link between literary journalism and comic journalism is the story telling. Despite the visual differences, these two both tell a story using a lot of description and carries the reader throughout all scenes. The only difference I see is the visuals. It is like an added bonus for the reader because not only do they get descriptive details, they also get images to go with the scenes. For example, when Sacco describes the ride in the elevator and writes, "The elevators at her sister's building were destroyed by shelling...it's 11 floors up..." Not only can you image that scene, you can see it as well. It tells the story in two very different ways.
I do think it is possible to consider comic journalism a subgenre of literary journalism because they essential do the same thing for the reader. People tell stories in different ways and that doesn't mean everything has to be so black and white. Adding a touch of visual can make a huge difference in the impact it has on a reader.
Comics don't just add "visuals." It's by nature a hybrid verbal-visual form -- that is, visuals define it as what it is. Also, think about the associations that comics have -- with escapism, juveniles, superheroes. Can such a form be effectively employed for factual purposes?
It's funny, I think I found Sacco's "Christmas with Karadzic" more striking and effective than any other piece we've read this year. It's not that the material itself is necessarily more interesting, but Sacco's delivery, with flashy comic art and crisp, succinct dialogue, makes it all the easier to get drawn into his madcap world. I think the most key element to note here is that due to the obvious space confines, with rather miniscule bubbles, the author can only cram in so much dialogue, thus ridding of useless filler.
Now, that isn't to say such an offbeat form could ever necessarily go mainstream. After all, those who aren't thrilled with the comic strip format may not hop on board when the adventures of Batman and Superman are replaced with the latest on Tiger Woods' mistresses and the UK elections. It is an idiosyncratic form, but I also believe it has a certain, perhaps small, niche in the literary journalism world.
I think literary journalism is a subculture of journalism and comic journalism is a subculture of literary journalism. As far as the question about if a comic form can be effectively employed for factual purposes, my answer is yes. Comic books in general do have a certain stigma that goes with them, prepubescent teens reading about superheroes and anime porn. However, there is some good stuff out there. I read a book that was a comic, Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi. Actually, I think it was referred to as an autobiographical graphic novel, but same difference. The book was about her life during the Iraqi Iranian War and the Islamic Revolution. It took a complicated subject and made it interesting and personal. It took something abstract and made it real and relatable.
In both literary journalism and in comic journalism the writer conveys images. In comic journalism the images are true images and in literary journalism the images are created by words. Both are first person perspective, and in that way they are subjective. In “Christmas with Karadzic” the author paints a reality with his pictures, but in fact it is nothing more than his perception and memories of the adventure which is highly subjective.
I found it interesting that Professor Good mentioned the general connection we make between comics and heroism and/or escapism, as I think these values were permeated in a number of literary pieces that we have read this semester. At least in my admittedly brief experiences reading comics and/or graphic novels, these pieces often examine the rise and fall of an icon, with more serious graphic work (such as "Christmas with Karadzic") revealing the truth behind idealized notions of the way things should be. Isn't this what Hunter Thompson sought to do when he was "looking for the American dream" and writing stories about an iconic horse race without ever mentioning the race? What about Breslin's unique take on the JFK assasination? The argument could be made that comics are often over-the-top in their hero worship, but wasn't Richard Harding Davis equally romantic in his Christ-like descriptions of the the Cuban man killed by Spaniards? I can't help but see these similar motifs pop up in literary journalism and comics, which leads me to believe that there has to be some kind of connection between these two methods of story telling.
Sacco’s comic journalism piece explains the political, religious-based Serbian genocide that wiped away Bosnian Muslim drawn out by Radovan Karadžić who went missing to avoid arrest. Literary journalism is a bit more difficult when the ‘news’ events that happened in the past fade into obscurity, relying on descriptive language to keep the reader’s attention. Sacco can rely on satire and witty art to portray how hard it was for the press to go through Bosnia’s guarded borders. I think you must careful how you draw out important ‘characters’ in comic journalism since some of the stories are meant to be serious, and not Stan Lee superheroes. Comic journalism improves the reader’s understanding of (at least for me) clear dialogue, actual setting and flashbacks compared to the uphill battle that literary journalism can face. Both still add suspense, some sense of emotion and mystery to the ‘news’ coverage and try to inform their reader so I wouldn’t see why it couldn’t be a subgenre within literary journalism.
I was very interested to read my first piece of comic journalism. While I was reading, I found it difficult to try to break off from the conventional text and see the bigger story with the images meant to project the story forward. Comics are defined by their visuals. In the typical comic book, there is often a sensationalized reality where superheroes have infinite power over all. As you have pointed out, this type of fictionalized world gives the adolescent readers a sense of escapism to an alternative universe where things aren’t based in reality. I recently read a non-fiction graphic novel on Hurricane Katrina which was different from any other graphic novels or strips I have read. I had a similar experience when I read this piece. I think the issue that I had was that the text was that it was so broken up by the pictures that I lost the flow in the story.
Literary journalists only use their words to create stories in the minds of their readers. Comic journalism relies on pictures to push the story forward with the disjointed text in between. I think that just as literary journalism can be considered a form of news telling, comic journalism can as well, but I believe that when art is involved, the news worthy information mixed within the pictures becomes harder for me personally to interpret. I do think that a lot of this is a personal choice for the reader. Everyone is able to retain information in different ways and each form of journalism imparts the information to their readers differently. It is all a matter of choosing what works for you.
I feel like there is a direct correlation between comics journalism and literary journalism. In fact I feel like comics journalism is defiantly a subgenera of lit journalism, in the sense that it tells a somewhat distorted or opinionated, as in how the writer/comic experienced, view of an actual event; sort of Thompson-esque. The difference is that the images are no longer created in the readers mind but are here on display as though there isn't another way to picture the story being told. This is in a sense related to Howie's comment about escapism. Perhaps some readers will only take the images provided rather than imagine it on their own. This technique to some extent could skew the readers perception of the event and, to some, can become a manipulated and inaccurate account. Although, Saco could have drawn the IFOR as actual frogs. I personally was distracted by the images because they were not what I was picturing in my mind and the story seemed a little more directed than I like when reading. However, there are a lot of scenes where the character reflecting is drawn siting down reflecting instead of the actual events, which leaves room for imagination, and thus escapism fantasy-like visuals. Although you could almost say the same thing about photo journalism; each photo is a reflection of the images that the photojournalist feels are what the viewer wants to see, or how they feel the event should be seen. The comics add images to words, but in some cases the images block the ability of the words to expand.
I can't help but think about political cartoons. I have a weird thing about them, I love them and I collect them all the time. But I have to say a large amount of them are more liberal based. Sure they are about compelling content and important issues, but don't they give a somewhat (although informative) opinionated view if an issue sometimes?
I believe there are plenty of links between comic book journalism and literary journalism. They both use unconventional means to portray a conventional story, but where a literary journalism piece would use excessive description or feelings to supplement the story a comic book journalist would use a comic panel and the drawings to explain the same thing. Comic book journalism could be considered a subgenera of literary journalism because they both exhibit innovation in the field of journalism and an openness in the way a story can be told.
I have always been a huge comic book nerd. Something about the style of comic books attracts me to them. I was really excited to read some comic book journalism. I definitely enjoyed it. I really thing that comic book journalism is, and should be considered, a subgenre of literary journalism. I actually think comics lend themselves well to the style of literary journalism. With comics, the message hits a lot harder, because of all the freedom you are given with panels. It allows for a ton of images, which are incredibly powerful when it comes to making a point. Also, these panels can forego images and just use text.
Traditional literary journalism employs only text to tell a story and make a point. I definitely think comic book journalism tries to do the same, but helps the reader out visually. When I used to read comic books, I started when I was very young, because the pictures were easy to follow and there wasn't a lot of text all at once. This can be a benefit in journalism, because you can reach a wider audience.
I do believe that the form can be used for serious purposes. I answer this part of the question last because it seems most obvious to me. I learned somethng from Sacco's piece, and I learned a lot of lessons from comic books as a kid.
I think literary journalism and comics journalism relate for a couple of reasons and can be a sub-genre of literary journalism. They can both portray an event in a blunt way compared to "newsy" styled piece of writing. They both get an impactful story told in their own way. For literary journalism, the story is visual through the sentences and verbs that are put together. And the comics journalism is visual and impactful through the cartoons that go with the wording. I also think they are both very entertaining pieces of writing. They give the reader space to interpret things how they want, while still giving them factual information.
I think comics journalism and literary journalism are very much so related. They both present journalism in an unconventional way that can get the reader to see different angles of what happened. You don't just get the news, you get how people felt, the atmosphere, and what it was really like to be there. Comic journalism could be considered a subgenre because it adds much of the same elements to journalism that literary journalism does. There are illustrations which allows you to see what the writer wants you to see. It is the same with literary journalism, but instead of illustrations you get the same sort of visual through the descriptions it provides. Both comic and literary are descriptive in ways that conventional journalism isn't and bridges that gap between the straight facts and the emotions and atmosphere behind what's going on.
I think that comics journalism and literary journalism do have their connections, because the overall goal is the same. However, comics journalism is a completely different read than literary journalism.
When reading literary journalism, it is up to the reader to produce an image in their head of the story. With comics journalism, the writer adds a different element and uses images to tell the story. The comic strips and bold and exaggerated font can almost suck the reader in, and therefore can be incredibly effective.
I do think comics journalism can and should be considered a sub-genre of literary journalism, because they are both doing the same thing in a sense, just in a different matter of presenting it to a reader. The beautiful part of journalism is that it has its sub-genres, which expands the field to different types of writing.
Those who create comics are able to used images to get their point across. Even a good writer can sometimes struggle to get their point across to everybody, but an image can be easier to take in. I don't think comics can be used to provide factual news. Instead, comics provide an opinion, a point of view which is why political cartoons have become so popular in journalism.
Political cartoons influence the readers, the cartoons communicate a specific idea that the creator wants the reader to consider.
Like comics, literary journalism is very much influential. It does not give the reader the opportunity to make their own opinion. Instead, it illustrates a story and forces an opinion upon them. Whether or not the reader wants to agree, is another story.
I think the link between comics journalism and literary journalism is that they are both attempting to say something about the world. They both have a wit about them that is used almost exclusively seen in these genres.
I'm not sure if you can consider comics journalism as a subgenre of literary journalism. Maybe. I guess you could if you break down what it is to be literary. Comics are referred to as "graphic novels." Sacco just kind of throws himself out there, experimenting with form and style. I respect that courage, even though I'm not a fan of comics. I think, after writing it through, I would call it a subgenre. We all agree Thompson's work was and he had pictures in a lot of his stuff. Sacco just uses way more pictures.
It is defiantly possible to consider comic book journalism a sub genre of literary journalism, because they both tell a story, in a story form. Not in a news story form, but a chronological, account of an incident with more humor and or details than a news story would. In this way- they are very similar.
The similarities that stood out the most to me in this piece and literary journalism pieces we have read, would be its looseness, and humor. Despite the fact that this "comic book" was actually touching the issue of war and mass genocide, it was consistently amusing and had many jokes. The jokes in particular, that served as sort o commentary made the story more understandable, and accessible. "I mean, would it really be Christmas if you weren't spraying the sky with your assault rifle?"
I think if some one wrote this account with no images, in a news-story format, the same impact would not have been attained.
The sort of satire feel in this piece was really interesting, it was almost like a spoof of a noir detective movie, two reporters on dangerous turf, looking for the scoop. But despite the funny parts this piece was actually informative, and captured the atmosphere of the time in this place, so in my eyes it succeeds as a sub genre of literary journalism.
17 comments:
With literary journalism, the writer only has their words to rely on in order to create meaning for the reader. But, with comics journalism, there is the opportunity to literally create the image you want your reader to see, or be a part of.
It goes a step beyond using feeling as fact. The whole story, in comics journalism, relies on your perception of events, psychically and physically, not only do you have to interpret feelings, but you must draw the scenes you were apart of.
I think it’s possible to consider comics journalism a sort of sub-genre of literary journalism, but I think for a broader majority of people, it might be harder to accept as “factual news.”
Christmas with Karadzic is a comic that provides a social commentary. Part of the story contrasts the facts of Karadzic and his crimes in leading a mass genocide with the images of him praying at Christmas day mass, as Sacco grapples with trying to feel the anger and resentment he knows he holds towards this man, but can’t seem to find in that moment. One of the most significant image/textual contrast I found was on the last page of this story, where he’s attending Christmas dinner with his landlady, Rada and he is describing how the war has affected the specific people in that room and the pictures are of them hugging and kissing loved ones and sharing a meal as he’s telling us the number of total deaths. It reminded me of Martha Gellhorn’s piece “The Third Winter is the Hardest.” Her straightforward passages are similar to the straightforward scenes drawn by Sacco, and the parenthetical, reflective passages are the bubbled-off text of what’s going on inside his head.
I think the link between literary journalism and comic journalism is the story telling. Despite the visual differences, these two both tell a story using a lot of description and carries the reader throughout all scenes. The only difference I see is the visuals. It is like an added bonus for the reader because not only do they get descriptive details, they also get images to go with the scenes. For example, when Sacco describes the ride in the elevator and writes, "The elevators at her sister's building were destroyed by shelling...it's 11 floors up..." Not only can you image that scene, you can see it as well. It tells the story in two very different ways.
I do think it is possible to consider comic journalism a subgenre of literary journalism because they essential do the same thing for the reader. People tell stories in different ways and that doesn't mean everything has to be so black and white. Adding a touch of visual can make a huge difference in the impact it has on a reader.
Comics don't just add "visuals." It's by nature a hybrid verbal-visual form -- that is, visuals define it as what it is. Also, think about the associations that comics have -- with escapism, juveniles, superheroes. Can such a form be effectively employed for factual purposes?
It's funny, I think I found Sacco's "Christmas with Karadzic" more striking and effective than any other piece we've read this year. It's not that the material itself is necessarily more interesting, but Sacco's delivery, with flashy comic art and crisp, succinct dialogue, makes it all the easier to get drawn into his madcap world. I think the most key element to note here is that due to the obvious space confines, with rather miniscule bubbles, the author can only cram in so much dialogue, thus ridding of useless filler.
Now, that isn't to say such an offbeat form could ever necessarily go mainstream. After all, those who aren't thrilled with the comic strip format may not hop on board when the adventures of Batman and Superman are replaced with the latest on Tiger Woods' mistresses and the UK elections. It is an idiosyncratic form, but I also believe it has a certain, perhaps small, niche in the literary journalism world.
I think literary journalism is a subculture of journalism and comic journalism is a subculture of literary journalism. As far as the question about if a comic form can be effectively employed for factual purposes, my answer is yes. Comic books in general do have a certain stigma that goes with them, prepubescent teens reading about superheroes and anime porn. However, there is some good stuff out there. I read a book that was a comic, Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi. Actually, I think it was referred to as an autobiographical graphic novel, but same difference. The book was about her life during the Iraqi Iranian War and the Islamic Revolution. It took a complicated subject and made it interesting and personal. It took something abstract and made it real and relatable.
In both literary journalism and in comic journalism the writer conveys images. In comic journalism the images are true images and in literary journalism the images are created by words. Both are first person perspective, and in that way they are subjective. In “Christmas with Karadzic” the author paints a reality with his pictures, but in fact it is nothing more than his perception and memories of the adventure which is highly subjective.
I found it interesting that Professor Good mentioned the general connection we make between comics and heroism and/or escapism, as I think these values were permeated in a number of literary pieces that we have read this semester. At least in my admittedly brief experiences reading comics and/or graphic novels, these pieces often examine the rise and fall of an icon, with more serious graphic work (such as "Christmas with Karadzic") revealing the truth behind idealized notions of the way things should be. Isn't this what Hunter Thompson sought to do when he was "looking for the American dream" and writing stories about an iconic horse race without ever mentioning the race? What about Breslin's unique take on the JFK assasination? The argument could be made that comics are often over-the-top in their hero worship, but wasn't Richard Harding Davis equally romantic in his Christ-like descriptions of the the Cuban man killed by Spaniards? I can't help but see these similar motifs pop up in literary journalism and comics, which leads me to believe that there has to be some kind of connection between these two methods of story telling.
Sacco’s comic journalism piece explains the political, religious-based Serbian genocide that wiped away Bosnian Muslim drawn out by Radovan Karadžić who went missing to avoid arrest. Literary journalism is a bit more difficult when the ‘news’ events that happened in the past fade into obscurity, relying on descriptive language to keep the reader’s attention. Sacco can rely on satire and witty art to portray how hard it was for the press to go through Bosnia’s guarded borders. I think you must careful how you draw out important ‘characters’ in comic journalism since some of the stories are meant to be serious, and not Stan Lee superheroes. Comic journalism improves the reader’s understanding of (at least for me) clear dialogue, actual setting and flashbacks compared to the uphill battle that literary journalism can face. Both still add suspense, some sense of emotion and mystery to the ‘news’ coverage and try to inform their reader so I wouldn’t see why it couldn’t be a subgenre within literary journalism.
I was very interested to read my first piece of comic journalism. While I was reading, I found it difficult to try to break off from the conventional text and see the bigger story with the images meant to project the story forward. Comics are defined by their visuals. In the typical comic book, there is often a sensationalized reality where superheroes have infinite power over all. As you have pointed out, this type of fictionalized world gives the adolescent readers a sense of escapism to an alternative universe where things aren’t based in reality. I recently read a non-fiction graphic novel on Hurricane Katrina which was different from any other graphic novels or strips I have read. I had a similar experience when I read this piece. I think the issue that I had was that the text was that it was so broken up by the pictures that I lost the flow in the story.
Literary journalists only use their words to create stories in the minds of their readers. Comic journalism relies on pictures to push the story forward with the disjointed text in between. I think that just as literary journalism can be considered a form of news telling, comic journalism can as well, but I believe that when art is involved, the news worthy information mixed within the pictures becomes harder for me personally to interpret. I do think that a lot of this is a personal choice for the reader. Everyone is able to retain information in different ways and each form of journalism imparts the information to their readers differently. It is all a matter of choosing what works for you.
I feel like there is a direct correlation between comics journalism and literary journalism. In fact I feel like comics journalism is defiantly a subgenera of lit journalism, in the sense that it tells a somewhat distorted or opinionated, as in how the writer/comic experienced, view of an actual event; sort of Thompson-esque. The difference is that the images are no longer created in the readers mind but are here on display as though there isn't another way to picture the story being told. This is in a sense related to Howie's comment about escapism. Perhaps some readers will only take the images provided rather than imagine it on their own. This technique to some extent could skew the readers perception of the event and, to some, can become a manipulated and inaccurate account. Although, Saco could have drawn the IFOR as actual frogs.
I personally was distracted by the images because they were not what I was picturing in my mind and the story seemed a little more directed than I like when reading. However, there are a lot of scenes where the character reflecting is drawn siting down reflecting instead of the actual events, which leaves room for imagination, and thus escapism fantasy-like visuals.
Although you could almost say the same thing about photo journalism; each photo is a reflection of the images that the photojournalist feels are what the viewer wants to see, or how they feel the event should be seen. The comics add images to words, but in some cases the images block the ability of the words to expand.
I can't help but think about political cartoons. I have a weird thing about them, I love them and I collect them all the time. But I have to say a large amount of them are more liberal based. Sure they are about compelling content and important issues, but don't they give a somewhat (although informative) opinionated view if an issue sometimes?
I believe there are plenty of links between comic book journalism and literary journalism. They both use unconventional means to portray a conventional story, but where a literary journalism piece would use excessive description or feelings to supplement the story a comic book journalist would use a comic panel and the drawings to explain the same thing. Comic book journalism could be considered a subgenera of literary journalism because they both exhibit innovation in the field of journalism and an openness in the way a story can be told.
I have always been a huge comic book nerd. Something about the style of comic books attracts me to them. I was really excited to read some comic book journalism. I definitely enjoyed it. I really thing that comic book journalism is, and should be considered, a subgenre of literary journalism. I actually think comics lend themselves well to the style of literary journalism. With comics, the message hits a lot harder, because of all the freedom you are given with panels. It allows for a ton of images, which are incredibly powerful when it comes to making a point. Also, these panels can forego images and just use text.
Traditional literary journalism employs only text to tell a story and make a point. I definitely think comic book journalism tries to do the same, but helps the reader out visually. When I used to read comic books, I started when I was very young, because the pictures were easy to follow and there wasn't a lot of text all at once. This can be a benefit in journalism, because you can reach a wider audience.
I do believe that the form can be used for serious purposes. I answer this part of the question last because it seems most obvious to me. I learned somethng from Sacco's piece, and I learned a lot of lessons from comic books as a kid.
I think literary journalism and comics journalism relate for a couple of reasons and can be a sub-genre of literary journalism. They can both portray an event in a blunt way compared to "newsy" styled piece of writing. They both get an impactful story told in their own way. For literary journalism, the story is visual through the sentences and verbs that are put together. And the comics journalism is visual and impactful through the cartoons that go with the wording.
I also think they are both very entertaining pieces of writing. They give the reader space to interpret things how they want, while still giving them factual information.
I think comics journalism and literary journalism are very much so related. They both present journalism in an unconventional way that can get the reader to see different angles of what happened. You don't just get the news, you get how people felt, the atmosphere, and what it was really like to be there. Comic journalism could be considered a subgenre because it adds much of the same elements to journalism that literary journalism does. There are illustrations which allows you to see what the writer wants you to see. It is the same with literary journalism, but instead of illustrations you get the same sort of visual through the descriptions it provides. Both comic and literary are descriptive in ways that conventional journalism isn't and bridges that gap between the straight facts and the emotions and atmosphere behind what's going on.
I think that comics journalism and literary journalism do have their connections, because the overall goal is the same. However, comics journalism is a completely different read than literary journalism.
When reading literary journalism, it is up to the reader to produce an image in their head of the story. With comics journalism, the writer adds a different element and uses images to tell the story. The comic strips and bold and exaggerated font can almost suck the reader in, and therefore can be incredibly effective.
I do think comics journalism can and should be considered a sub-genre of literary journalism, because they are both doing the same thing in a sense, just in a different matter of presenting it to a reader. The beautiful part of journalism is that it has its sub-genres, which expands the field to different types of writing.
Those who create comics are able to used images to get their point across. Even a good writer can sometimes struggle to get their point across to everybody, but an image can be easier to take in.
I don't think comics can be used to provide factual news. Instead, comics provide an opinion, a point of view which is why political cartoons have become so popular in journalism.
Political cartoons influence the readers, the cartoons communicate a specific idea that the creator wants the reader to consider.
Like comics, literary journalism is very much influential. It does not give the reader the opportunity to make their own opinion. Instead, it illustrates a story and forces an opinion upon them. Whether or not the reader wants to agree, is another story.
I think the link between comics journalism and literary journalism is that they are both attempting to say something about the world. They both have a wit about them that is used almost exclusively seen in these genres.
I'm not sure if you can consider comics journalism as a subgenre of literary journalism. Maybe. I guess you could if you break down what it is to be literary. Comics are referred to as "graphic novels." Sacco just kind of throws himself out there, experimenting with form and style. I respect that courage, even though I'm not a fan of comics. I think, after writing it through, I would call it a subgenre. We all agree Thompson's work was and he had pictures in a lot of his stuff. Sacco just uses way more pictures.
It is defiantly possible to consider comic book journalism a sub genre of literary journalism, because they both tell a story, in a story form. Not in a news story form, but a chronological, account of an incident with more humor and or details than a news story would. In this way- they are very similar.
The similarities that stood out the most to me in this piece and literary journalism pieces we have read, would be its looseness, and humor. Despite the fact that this "comic book" was actually touching the issue of war and mass genocide, it was consistently amusing and had many jokes. The jokes in particular, that served as sort o commentary made the story more understandable, and accessible. "I mean, would it really be Christmas if you weren't spraying the sky with your assault rifle?"
I think if some one wrote this account with no images, in a news-story format, the same impact would not have been attained.
The sort of satire feel in this piece was really interesting, it was almost like a spoof of a noir detective movie, two reporters on dangerous turf, looking for the scoop. But despite the funny parts this piece was actually informative, and captured the atmosphere of the time in this place, so in my eyes it succeeds as a sub genre of literary journalism.
Post a Comment