Violence in Comics
Some time ago at a community about comics the discussion about Violence in topics was posted. I shared the following thoughts:
I was raised in a time where a franchise known as Mortal Kombat, (along came Street Fighter and Killer Instinct) went to the edge with extreme violence and powerful body-builders be it female or male at best...and at worse there were all-gore violent monstrous characters. They were all trained to kill one another. Only one would defeat them all to become a winner. Despite all controversies (which by the way was founded by unique passionate devoted Artists and not serial killers or criminals of any sort) the game hit fame instantly and it became most iconic, trascending, and innovative game of its era. Furthermore: As the second installment was developing, the franchise released a comic series showing arch-stories between characters, inner-personal stories. If the game was not legendary enough this input would surely multiply the whole spectrum of it.
Meanwhile, I was a lonely, shy, naive kid who had no clue what the real world was all about. And believe me I was not even much into video games even...until Mortal Kombat. Suddenly an entire universe proved being more epic than boring summer days. And I was thrilled to know all about it. Deep awe could describe my excitement. I was not even a good gamer. I would stare in awe just watching the mysterious backgrounds, moved by the stories and brutal outcomes..
In other words, the violence factor had zero effect on me or should I just said it was anything but a negative "impact". I was not attracted to commit murder, shoot a stranger or rape someone. Instead, I embraced the idea of its mystical story, all the secrets and symbology, the character personalities, the spectacular soundtrack of course, too. Violence as in "violence" was not even a well defined concept in my brain in the first place. If anything it represented the dangers to failure your goal, so you had to be "clever enough with your moves to carry on" As an Adult, to this day I agree with such premise, and probably now makes much more sense when it comes to take care of myself. The idea of danger is reasonable and truthful be it in the streets, social media, at work, at school, etc. THAT being said it is up to yourself what your inclinations are and what you make of what you are presented. Choices must be made not censored. Choices can be meaningful in every way if creativity is the engine to inspire and promote inspiration. Violence can not be hidden. It is part of the imperfection of humanity and a story where there is no proof of such realistic behaviour make a story poor. You don't believe me?
Let us go back in time when Edgar A. Poe brought his most amazing dark stories, or when Sir Arthur Conan Doyle published the first novels of Sherlock Holmes. Was there any violence? Certainly there was. Dark themes yet wonderful lessons and insightful dialogues. What would it be of all these stories without violence in mind? Imagine these Authors trying to avoid the reader being exposed to violent moment in each story. I doubt they would have make a story as verosimil without it. It just would be so unreal where there is no danger that there would be no climax, no purpose for reflection. Hence iolence is ideal to portray the extreme, death as if there is no turning back to it. Ideal to reflect to feeling of adrenaline, the vertigo of it all. None of Shakespeare stories would have been more universal withouth death being crucial, or Greek Mythologies. They were all about super powers from Gods and Godess and there was bloody encounters and violence. And yes I READ THOSE stories being a kid. And no one has faced a brutal end by my hand other than ink on my sheets.
To conclude: violence can not bring negative implications to your formation if that is the point we are discussing. Violence is one thing and BEING violent is another. There is no proof of being exposed to violent themes and become violent because a THEME can not be the cause of violence. What makes you violent is when someone has been violent to you.
The topic went on, and some people came up with new sub topics, which I think went off the point. It all led to some controversies. The violence factor in stories is essential is fairly well achieved. I consider is a fair literary elemtn as many others. It must be understood as the rest, for the sake of creativity without restrictions.
Next I am attaching a response more specifically about Allan Moore authorship. Some new member (someone with 40 friends in facebook who never replied back after saying what he said) argued that Allan Moore Violence was too much pointed out Watchmen series as a bad story . The following are the exact words he wrote:
"Regarding violence in general, I agree that we should look at better solutions and methods of storytelling in comics, but we like action, adventure, and easy solutions. Violence provides that and spills over into our real life attitudes more from Superman than esoteric comics like The Watchmen. 36,000 gun deaths a year in America, more than any other country in the world. Something for us to think about."
And here my answer (and now on this blog improved and more ellaborated)
.
Allan Moore is British. True statement. Now what you should know is that Allan was anything but nationalistic. I am sure he was not trying to give a lesson to another flag. Instead his message was delivered towards humanity. That being said, using a premise as "this guy was from this part of the world so probably this is why he did what he did" I think may not be the case for Allan. As for looking at solutions. I am not sure what you refer as in solutions. Storytelling is already a magical place full of solutions for us Artist (you got to be an Artist to understand what it is intended) to spend as much creativity with it. Using always the same lineal systematic formula is not only boring but it is not helpful to develop new ideas either. Violence is as REAL as squirrels being ran over by trucks in the middle of the road. The primal fear of humans in their attempt to achieve their own desires is pretty much what makes humanity as imperfect. Violence is connected to survival and instincts. It is not an illusion. Violence exist. Hiding it will not make it disappear. This is why I find it compelling, crude, verosimile stories like "Watchmen". They have tons of elements that talk about inner struggles in characters and there are lots of symbols which make it more interesting even.. As for Esoterism: I think is not what the story was going for. Could not get that sentence of yours. Speaking of diverging..
PS : by the way, if you read the story: Osterman is the most peaceful human of all Watchmen. He is not a thread. He is the one who actually decides by own choice to leave the planet and remain alone. How is that considered a thread?
It is not based on morality whatsoever, but giving human atributes to heroes instead of letting the audience feel satisfied with whatever they considered morally correct and or appropiate. Basically brings out lots of questions rather than answers. It goes beyond the idea of heroes doing what we us believe a hero should be all about...but letting understand they all have struggles. they are not machines. Way before them heroic personality was extremely flat. they would do all they were told as demanded...so mechanical and sistematic. Watchmen brought reality to its finest.
I was raised in a time where a franchise known as Mortal Kombat, (along came Street Fighter and Killer Instinct) went to the edge with extreme violence and powerful body-builders be it female or male at best...and at worse there were all-gore violent monstrous characters. They were all trained to kill one another. Only one would defeat them all to become a winner. Despite all controversies (which by the way was founded by unique passionate devoted Artists and not serial killers or criminals of any sort) the game hit fame instantly and it became most iconic, trascending, and innovative game of its era. Furthermore: As the second installment was developing, the franchise released a comic series showing arch-stories between characters, inner-personal stories. If the game was not legendary enough this input would surely multiply the whole spectrum of it.
Meanwhile, I was a lonely, shy, naive kid who had no clue what the real world was all about. And believe me I was not even much into video games even...until Mortal Kombat. Suddenly an entire universe proved being more epic than boring summer days. And I was thrilled to know all about it. Deep awe could describe my excitement. I was not even a good gamer. I would stare in awe just watching the mysterious backgrounds, moved by the stories and brutal outcomes..
In other words, the violence factor had zero effect on me or should I just said it was anything but a negative "impact". I was not attracted to commit murder, shoot a stranger or rape someone. Instead, I embraced the idea of its mystical story, all the secrets and symbology, the character personalities, the spectacular soundtrack of course, too. Violence as in "violence" was not even a well defined concept in my brain in the first place. If anything it represented the dangers to failure your goal, so you had to be "clever enough with your moves to carry on" As an Adult, to this day I agree with such premise, and probably now makes much more sense when it comes to take care of myself. The idea of danger is reasonable and truthful be it in the streets, social media, at work, at school, etc. THAT being said it is up to yourself what your inclinations are and what you make of what you are presented. Choices must be made not censored. Choices can be meaningful in every way if creativity is the engine to inspire and promote inspiration. Violence can not be hidden. It is part of the imperfection of humanity and a story where there is no proof of such realistic behaviour make a story poor. You don't believe me?
Let us go back in time when Edgar A. Poe brought his most amazing dark stories, or when Sir Arthur Conan Doyle published the first novels of Sherlock Holmes. Was there any violence? Certainly there was. Dark themes yet wonderful lessons and insightful dialogues. What would it be of all these stories without violence in mind? Imagine these Authors trying to avoid the reader being exposed to violent moment in each story. I doubt they would have make a story as verosimil without it. It just would be so unreal where there is no danger that there would be no climax, no purpose for reflection. Hence iolence is ideal to portray the extreme, death as if there is no turning back to it. Ideal to reflect to feeling of adrenaline, the vertigo of it all. None of Shakespeare stories would have been more universal withouth death being crucial, or Greek Mythologies. They were all about super powers from Gods and Godess and there was bloody encounters and violence. And yes I READ THOSE stories being a kid. And no one has faced a brutal end by my hand other than ink on my sheets.
To conclude: violence can not bring negative implications to your formation if that is the point we are discussing. Violence is one thing and BEING violent is another. There is no proof of being exposed to violent themes and become violent because a THEME can not be the cause of violence. What makes you violent is when someone has been violent to you.
The topic went on, and some people came up with new sub topics, which I think went off the point. It all led to some controversies. The violence factor in stories is essential is fairly well achieved. I consider is a fair literary elemtn as many others. It must be understood as the rest, for the sake of creativity without restrictions.
Next I am attaching a response more specifically about Allan Moore authorship. Some new member (someone with 40 friends in facebook who never replied back after saying what he said) argued that Allan Moore Violence was too much pointed out Watchmen series as a bad story . The following are the exact words he wrote:
"Regarding violence in general, I agree that we should look at better solutions and methods of storytelling in comics, but we like action, adventure, and easy solutions. Violence provides that and spills over into our real life attitudes more from Superman than esoteric comics like The Watchmen. 36,000 gun deaths a year in America, more than any other country in the world. Something for us to think about."
And here my answer (and now on this blog improved and more ellaborated)
.
Allan Moore is British. True statement. Now what you should know is that Allan was anything but nationalistic. I am sure he was not trying to give a lesson to another flag. Instead his message was delivered towards humanity. That being said, using a premise as "this guy was from this part of the world so probably this is why he did what he did" I think may not be the case for Allan. As for looking at solutions. I am not sure what you refer as in solutions. Storytelling is already a magical place full of solutions for us Artist (you got to be an Artist to understand what it is intended) to spend as much creativity with it. Using always the same lineal systematic formula is not only boring but it is not helpful to develop new ideas either. Violence is as REAL as squirrels being ran over by trucks in the middle of the road. The primal fear of humans in their attempt to achieve their own desires is pretty much what makes humanity as imperfect. Violence is connected to survival and instincts. It is not an illusion. Violence exist. Hiding it will not make it disappear. This is why I find it compelling, crude, verosimile stories like "Watchmen". They have tons of elements that talk about inner struggles in characters and there are lots of symbols which make it more interesting even.. As for Esoterism: I think is not what the story was going for. Could not get that sentence of yours. Speaking of diverging..
PS : by the way, if you read the story: Osterman is the most peaceful human of all Watchmen. He is not a thread. He is the one who actually decides by own choice to leave the planet and remain alone. How is that considered a thread?
It is not based on morality whatsoever, but giving human atributes to heroes instead of letting the audience feel satisfied with whatever they considered morally correct and or appropiate. Basically brings out lots of questions rather than answers. It goes beyond the idea of heroes doing what we us believe a hero should be all about...but letting understand they all have struggles. they are not machines. Way before them heroic personality was extremely flat. they would do all they were told as demanded...so mechanical and sistematic. Watchmen brought reality to its finest.
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario