26 February 2012

Dylan Horrocks: Inventing Comics

Dylan Horrocks wrote a response to Scott McClouds: Understanding Comics. Horrocks response is called Inventing Comics and in this book Horrocks says and backs up his claims that Scott McCloud has a flaw or two in the book Understanding Comics. For instance in Horrocks book he says that McCloud says that egyptian wall paintings are comics but that children books are not considered comics, but one flaw with this is that McCloud also says that if you can understand the story by just looking at the pictures then it is considered a comic.Also according to Horrocks another big flaw in McClouds book is that fact that McCloud uses metaphors which Horrocks believes is already a difination in itself. Also McClouds defination of a comics is to broad and needs to be narrowed down for the readers to acutally understand the points that McCloud is trying to get across.

I agree with Dylan Horrocks more than McCloud because Horrocks is right about the fact that McCloud does leave out some important things in his book making it hard for someone like me who is not educated about comics fully understand what a comic truley is. Also is do agree with Horrocks that a childrens book is a comics because you can understand the story with just looking at the pictures and no the text.

1 comment:

  1. Kayla, your summary is much too short for how long Horrocks' essay is. You barely scratch the surface on a couple of his points. And you don't relate them specifically to any of McCloud's like I asked.

    You also need to proofread a little closer.