Question

can someone proof read this for me

Answer 1

The main argument is that Catherine Labio disagrees with the term "graphic novel" when people are referring to comics. The main topics are what would be proper terminology for a genre that is both narrative and visual. Also the fact that comic books are 'geographical', and when using the term "graphic novel", 'it relegates non-American comics to the background'. 'Academically, it represents a problematic territorial grab by literature scholars'. The information in the article is useful for the QEP assignment, however it almost has too much information because certain parts of the article are hard to read. The information is reliable due to the fact that sources are included and cited for the information. For the most part the article is written objectively but there are some subjective pronouns. My opinion hasn't changed but just been more informed about comic's or graphic novels thanks to this article. Certain parts of the article I had a hard time understanding what point they were trying to get across because of the wording used and the fact that they had quite a few cites and sources in the article.

Answer 2

this is the article:
comics, funnies, bande dessinée, jumetti, historieta, tebeo, manga, comic . . . this Cvaried nomenclature gives some indieation of the formal complexities of a genre that is both narrative and visual, that first flourished as a form of popular entertainment, that has a global reach, and that is formally and geographically hybrid. "Comics" and "funnies" point to the genre's lowly
origins; bande dessinée (drawn strip) stresses its visual and narradve dimensions (single drawings do not count);ßmetti (Utde puffs of smoke, i.e., speech balloons) underseores the deep connecdon between text and image, including text as im- age; historieta (little story) emphasizes the narrative aspect of the genre and sig- nals that it is not high Uterature; tebeo, a derivation from the name of the popular magazine TBO, reminds us that eomics owe much to the growth of mass-market periodicals in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries; manga, a term first coined by Katsushika Hokusai in connecdon with hasdly drawn caricatures, teUs us that these kinds of images do not belong to the tradidons of fine art and calligraphy. Some of these signifiers have also migrated to other languages and acquired additional or separate meanings in the process. When used in a French text, "eomics" refers only to North American eomics. In Spain, "comic" is gradually displacing "tebeo" and "historieta," and inJapan, "eomic," accord- ing to Brigitte Koyama-Richard, now "covers mangas of aU kinds."' A more recent entrant in the semiodc field threatens this complex ecosystem: "graphic novel," an idiom that has been adopted by publishers, translated into many languages, and—my main point of contendon—eagerly embraced by an- glophone scholars. The move toward this term is evident in sueh events as the pubUcadon of the MLA's Teaching the Graphie Novel (2009) and even in the new layout of the undergraduate library at Yale University: when it reopened in 2007 after extensive renovadons, classic and contemporary American, European, and Japanese comics were given pride of place in a "Graphic Novel" seedon.^ I wish to argue against using "graphie novel" as an umbrella term for a whole genre, while arguing for the retendon of the earlier, makeshift terminology, and for the adopdon of a mtüddisciplinary perspecdve to the budding field of Comics Studies. Defining our object of study—comics—is a fraught yet obligatory first step in the process of academic disciplinary formadon. I shall deal with this matter in some detaü below. A few observadons are nonetheless worth stadng at the outset. First, comics have tradidonally been mass-market products and condnue to be so, mutads mutandis. Sec- ond, they can be as short as a handful of panels, or they can be hundreds of pages long. Third, they are a global genre that draws on disdnct tradidons as weü as on an important cross-cultural disseminadon machine that features transladons, cooperadons between publishers and creators, and movie and web adaptadons. Fourth, they are a hybrid genre that is both visual and literary, but that generaüy does not privilege text over image. Scholars who use the term "graphic novel" to mean an endre genre are running from these basic facts. "Comics" is not a perfect term. (What term would be?) How- ever, no one now thinks of comics as referring only to works created for the funny pages of American newspapers. By being in so many ways utterly inadequate, "com- ics" has become a generic term. By contrast, the adoption of the label "graphic novel" to denote an entire genre (as opposed to a subset of comics) reflects a sad narrowing of the field to a very small and unrepresentative canon.^ Moreover, the process is dou- bly hegemonic: geographically, it relegates non-American comics to the background, while academically, it represents a problematic territorial grab by literature scholars. It is true that defining "comics" or "bande dessinée"—to limit myself to the lan- guages and traditions I know best—has not been easy. Patricia Mainardi, for instance, defines comics as "a single page or series of pages each containing muldple frames of images narrating an original story," while Pascal Lefevre defines comic strips as "the juxtaposition of fixed (mosdy drawn) pictures on a support as a communicative act. Comic strip stands here for the whole of drawn sequendal stories: stop comic, comic book, graphic novel, smaü press, bande dessinée, manga, etc.'"* Both agree that mul- dple pictures and some form of sequentialization are necessary. Their definitions vary, however, in part because so many different kinds of narratives exist and because they come from different backgrounds. As an art historian, Mainardi takes pains to for- mulate a definition that eliminates stained-glass windows and lives of saints. Trained in communications, Lefevre highlights different formal and sociocultural criteria. In particular, he wishes to distinguish comics ("fixed pictures") from füm and factor in the material and transactional features of the genre. Neither definidon refers to language in general or speech balloons in particular. Whether text must feature in any definidon of comics, and if so, to what extent and in what capacity (equal, dominant, or subordinate), is obviously of some consequence, and not only to literary scholars. And yet, many examples of wordless comics do exist. Whether these are merely oddities, a practical answer to language barriers, or, more important, demonstradons of the primacy of the visual over the textual is sdll an open quesdon. Nonetheless, there has been a marked shift away from the study of comics
as text, even in the case of French-language scholarship, a remarkable development if one considers that bande dessinée cridcism, which arose in the 1970s, was long domi- nated by structuralist, semiodc, and psychoanalydc methodologies. The decision of the Internadonal Bande Dessinée Society to dde its journal European Comic Art illus- trates the new trend well, as have Philippe Marion's Traces en cases {Panel Traces) and Thi- erry Groensteen's System of Comics. Writing from within the poststructuralist tradition, Marion insists on the primacy of drawing and quesdons the necessity of wridng and even narradve: "Bandee dessinée is first and foremost a drawing that evolves from one im- age to the next, within a spadal structure that adds up to a specific découpage, most often with a narrative purpose."^ More concerned with such quesdons as whether the panel or the page is the primary unit of meaning of a comic book, Groensteen pleads instead for a recognidon of the preeminence of the iconic dimension of comics on the grounds that "meaning is produced essendally through it"—not, in other words, through text.^ In spite of this clear trend in comics scholarship, however, the quesdon of the respecdve roles of text and image and their hierarchy has hardly been setded once and for all, a point succinctly made by François Ayroles in Ouhpian, or rather Oubapian, fashion in "Feinte trinité" [Feigned Trinity], a series of short comics made up only of speech bal- loons, created "while waidng for a comic strip without text or drawing."'' Defining comics is further complicated once one starts to study the taxonomy dia- chronically and to disdnguish between pardcular languages and tradidons. French critics, for example, have embraced and, more recently, rejected the colloquialism "BD," short for "bande dessinée." In 1976, when the editors of a special issue of Com- munications dded La bande dessinée et son discours [Comics and Its Discourse] decided to use the abbreviadon "BD," they did so to underscore their characterizadon of bande dessinée as irreducible to "l'Ordre des discours légitimes" [the order of legidmate discourses].^ Fast forward three decades to 2005, and Jean-Christophe Menu, one of the founders of the independent publishing house L'Association (which is often credited for the 1990s renaissance of bande dessinée), pointedly refuses to use the acronym: "We made it a point of pride to define the language that we defended by spelling out bande dessinée, leaving the abbreviation BD to those who were corrupdng it through standardizadon and commercialization."^ Setding on "graphic novel" only compounds the problems associated with the exist- ing terminology. First, "graphic novel," as well as the equally unsadsfactory "graphic narradve," privileges, quite wrongly in my view, the literary character of comics over the visual, by assigning the status of mere qualifier to the visual dimension.'" Second,
the term "graphic novel" elides too much, starting with the work of some of the great-
est American and European cartoonists, including Winsor McCay, George Herriman, Charles Schulz, and André Franquin, the author of many one-page masterpieces, most notably in the Gaston Lagaffe and Idées noires series. It also excludes many contem- porary African comics as well as some of the more innovative livres objets published by small presses like B.ü.L.B. Comix and Frémok." The list is not exhaustive. Third, translating "graphic novel" presents its own set of challenges. The French recepdon of the term, translated without apparent difliculty as roman graphique, is a case
in point. Jean-Christophe Menu of L'Associadon, which first published Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis (2000-2003) and David B.'s L'ascendon du haut-mal [Epileptic, 1996-2003), dismisses the growing use of the expression "roman graphique" as a corporate gimmick used by established publishers to hijack the innovadons introduced by small presses in the 1990s.'^ American crides and comics creators have expressed similar qualms.'^ The two cridques are grounded in different histories, however. Whereas the American under- ground comics tradidon has always been, by definition, independent of large producdon companies, the publicadon of bandes dessinées was concentrated in the hands of a few publishers from the 1930s onward. This accounts in part for the standardizadon of
bande dessinées to one format, the "48CC" (the forty-eight-page, four-color, hardcover album). Menu's principal worry is thus that major publishers' enthusiasm for the roman graphique will mean that the custom-fit formats of small-press producdons will soon be history: "We're heading toward a time when we'U be entided to two standards! Young authors will get to choose: 'Do you prefer characters or telling your life story?'"'* Finally, the eagerness with which the phrase "graphic novel" has been adopted in academic writing points to a stubborn refusal to accept popular works on their own terms. "Comics" reminds us of this vital dimension. "Graphic novel" sanitizes comics; strengthens the distinction between high and low, major and minor; and reinforces the ongoing ghettoizadon of works deemed unworthy of critical attendon, either because of their inherent nature (as in the case of works of humor) or because of their intended audience (lower, less-literate classes; children; and so on). Indeed, much would be lost if scholars were to jettison the comparative study of the complex sociolinguistic and cultural codes associated with comics in favor of a monocultural, one-note "graphic novel" in a sad search for respectability, relevance, and larger classes.

Answer 3

oh lord... thats a lot...

Answer 4

give me some time and i will read everything and tell you what i think