“I don’t think like a comic book artist or graphic novelist, I can’t draw the same character over in sequential panels. I’m really interested in abstraction—I think I’m letting myself inch towards it.”
Visual biography. Illustrated reportage. Graphic story. Lauren Redniss’ work Radioactive, centered on the private lives and innovations of scientists Marie and Pierre Curie, tends to elude the label of “comics,” whether due to critical reviews or Redniss’ comments, such as the one above. As explained in a Washington Post story:
It’s a strange book — it’s not a graphic novel,” says Redniss, who is also the author of 2006’s “Century Girl: 100 Years in the Life of Doris Eaton Travis, Last Living Star of the Ziegfeld Follies.” “It’s a combination of drawings and a type of print called ‘cyanotypes’ and the written word in which all the different elements combine to tell a story that could not be told by any one element alone.”
On the one hand, we ought to respect Redniss’ definition of the project––a “strange” mix of words and abstract images that amount to a complex, visual biography. By “strange,” she might be referring to the lack of panels and gutters that parse out her compositions. On the other hand, we ought to enrich her definition by looking at comics journalism and drawing on comics theory a la McCloud. Even if Redniss’ work isn’t a comic, per se, it evokes techniques familiar to the form. So, if we work with Redniss’ definition, and we put it in conversation with comics examples, then we might end up labeling Radioactive as sequential abstraction.
Radioactive, overall, isn’t a clean work of art. As an art form, many comics are clean because they are told in sequential panels; a clean comic, that is, is easy to follow. Reflecting the chaos and glow of the Curies’ productive lives, Radioactive features many long passages of written words often juxtaposed with abstract images, both of which are conveyed on cyanotype printing. While Redniss does not use panels, she tells the book in a chronological order, using images and words to chronicle the Curies’ lives. Sequences exist, albeit in a way that departs from many comics. In fact, Radioactive is largely powered by what McCloud deems “scene to scene,” insofar as Redniss pauses at critical moments in Curies’ scientific careers and private lives; her written words, complemented by drawings, help us understand where we are in time. One example, among many others, is her illustration on page 72, in which she describes the day that Marie defends her thesis and Pierre “unveiled a small cylinder of radium for his guests,” the final line guiding the reader to an illustrated cylinder and hand. What follows on page 73 is another hand, only that one contains a letter on Curie’s Nobel nominations. Thus, time continues through text-image compositions.
It’s a wonder if Redniss’ work would fall under comics journalism. A quick glance at Symbolia magazine, which has done great work in elevating comics journalism, shows composers experimenting with panels, texts and illustration styles in the name of reportage. In a way, the reportage gives way to art. The same holds true for Redniss; Radioactive drew energy from the Curie archives emanating from the Pantheon. Redniss, then, reported her finds through abstract compositions. Perhaps Radioactive is journalism in the abstract, glowing with comics techniques.
Not to be that guy again but I have to disagree with what the Washington Post had to say. Sure comics need that sequentialism and image/text relationship that works together to create a narrative neither could do originally, but Radioactive is a prime example of what happens when one element steps on the toes of the other. The imagery is almost 100% secondary. If it were all removed and given to a reader who only knew the story in the form of a script, that reader would still come away with all the elements of the story and be perfectly able to discuss the book with a reader who had the images. The cyanotype process even made the artwork become secondary due to how it needed to be created after the text. Just like in Fun Home, the art in Radioactive is just supplementary. But unlike Fun Home, there isn't any intended connection between the imagery and text. I agree with the author on this one.
ReplyDeleteI also wouldn't go so far as to say that Radioactive glows with comic techniques (though I assumed it was just a pun) since it's pretty far fetched from a comic to begin with. If Radioactive is using comic elements then so is Google Image search, and the encyclopedia. It's assuming that the loosest relationship between elements causes something to be a comic. There's nothing wrong with Radioactive being an illustrated novel. The author even agrees that her work isn't a comic or graphic novel. That connection is missing between image and text, no matter how great the content is. The children's book can still be a comic over Radioactive because of this. It's not welcoming them into a club or something that Radioactive isn't allowed in. It's just developing it's own style or genre that requires a new definition like collage journalism.
Not to be that guy again but I have to disagree with what the Washington Post had to say. Sure comics need that sequentialism and image/text relationship that works together to create a narrative neither could do originally, but Radioactive is a prime example of what happens when one element steps on the toes of the other. The imagery is almost 100% secondary. If it were all removed and given to a reader who only knew the story in the form of a script, that reader would still come away with all the elements of the story and be perfectly able to discuss the book with a reader who had the images. The cyanotype process even made the artwork become secondary due to how it needed to be created after the text. Just like in Fun Home, the art in Radioactive is just supplementary. But unlike Fun Home, there isn't any intended connection between the imagery and text. I agree with the author on this one.
ReplyDeleteI also wouldn't go so far as to say that Radioactive glows with comic techniques (though I assumed it was just a pun) since it's pretty far fetched from a comic to begin with. If Radioactive is using comic elements then so is Google Image search, and the encyclopedia. It's assuming that the loosest relationship between elements causes something to be a comic. There's nothing wrong with Radioactive being an illustrated novel. The author even agrees that her work isn't a comic or graphic novel. That connection is missing between image and text, no matter how great the content is. The children's book can still be a comic over Radioactive because of this. It's not welcoming them into a club or something that Radioactive isn't allowed in. It's just developing it's own style or genre that requires a new definition like collage journalism.