Dylan Horrocks wrote Inventing Comics: McCloud's Definition; a response to Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art. Horrocks is convinced that this is the most important book of comic theory. He is saying that Scott McCloud's definition of is what comics should be or shouldn't be. In Dylan Horrocks respond to the book he analyzes and takes a deeper look into McCloud's definition of comics. Horrocks begins to analyze different chapters and summarizes the beginning of the book in the start of his response. He inserts some of the panels featured in Understanding Comics. McCloud implies that if someone does not like comics they could at least admire the form of comics. Yes, not all comics are exactly but there are aspects where they could be admired and recognized.
Later in the essay, Horrocks begins to look into McCloud's definition of Comics. He goes into a great detail explaining that the definition of comics begins in sequential art. Sequential art is basically McCloud's definition of comics; that's where is all begins and ends. In Dylan Horrock's perspective McCloud is showing what he likes about comics. He shows what he admires most about comics. Horrocks also talks about how McCloud can define comics but cannot give the entire definition. McCloud believes that certain genres and forms that are similar to comics are not necessary considered comics. He does not consider children’s books as comics; yet they are so closely alike.
I have to agree with Dylan Horrocks because McCloud could not define his definition to it’s full potential. He struggles to make it valid. When I was done reading this response I was not even sure if I agree with McCloud anymore. Just due to the fact that his definition is still too broad and there are a lot of unanswered questions.