Lauren Parker asked me today why they call it a graphic novel. "Aren't they giving it more importance that it deserves?" she asked.
Having read many, many graphic novels in my time, I know that a graphic novel is just like a comic book, but often on better paper, with better color, a self-contained storyline (usually) and usually quite a bit longer than your average comic book. And the characters often get to curse in a graphic novel.
I explained that it's called a graphic novel because it's made up of graphics in book form (not that it's more graphic in nature than an ordinary comic book, as is a common misconception). It didn't occur to me until I was almost home that she was taking issue with the use of the word "novel."
But what I find interesting is that for her, the word "novel" denotes a higher level of quality than just an average paperback book. A novel has substance. Tom Sawyer is a novel. Of Mice and Men is a novel. I doubt that she would consider a harlequin romance book to be a novel. And to call a lowly comic book a "novel" seems to be some kind of an insult.
But I think that the word "novel" in graphic novel really just refers to its length. If a short story is analogous to a comic book, then a novel would be akin to a graphic novel. Originally graphic novels were quite a bit longer. Think Elfquest. But over time they have gotten shorter. There are some really horrible "novels" out there and I've read some genuinely crummy graphic novels, as well.
So, Lauren, rest assured that we harbor no illusions that just because we're going to see a movie based on a graphic novel that it speaks to its substance at all. We known that in all reality, will probably suck. What we're really after is the kids pack at then theater with popcorn, drink AND candy without having to share with any grubby, stinking kids.
No comments:
Post a Comment