You are viewing castellucci

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Comics are not literature Panel

The lovely Sara Ryan ( sararyan ) points out that Newsarama has a sum up of the very interesting and fascinating panel discussion we were on at Comic Con that Douglas Wolk moderated called Comics Are Not Literature.

I would like to say that when the article says Castellucci pointed out that not all prose books technically qualify as “literature,” and that she and Ryan had both been criticized as primarily “young adult novelists.”

I was saying something along the lines that not all prose books could be considered good literature. The young adult thing was like, sentences later.


( 11 comments — Leave a comment )
Aug. 7th, 2007 09:10 pm (UTC)
hi cecil! it was so nice meeting you and boy cecil! i LOVED plain janes! i read it on the plane home and now plain janes is my favorite cecil book!! =)
Aug. 7th, 2007 09:51 pm (UTC)
...And I am quite sure I didn't issue a wholesale diss of prose writers who start writing comics! And I'm fairly positive I didn't mention Joss Whedon, whose comics I like just fine--!

But yeah. (And it was SO great to have you on that panel, Cecil!)
Aug. 7th, 2007 10:22 pm (UTC)
She and Ryan had both been criticized as primarily “young adult novelists.”

Really? Because you weren't writing middle grade? Or what? And who said that. Because, well, how odd.
Aug. 7th, 2007 11:18 pm (UTC)
I went to Douglas Wolk's Boston reading, and that was a blast. I would have loved to have been at this panel-- it sounds nuclear.
Aug. 7th, 2007 11:38 pm (UTC)
yeah, and i also think we were saying that bjork's fashion is always art ;) -- but man, he did a better job than i would have of trying to sum up that conversation!
Aug. 8th, 2007 03:11 am (UTC)
Just a note to say that the Plain Janes were all sold out at Forbidden Planet NYC. Dammit.
Aug. 8th, 2007 02:22 pm (UTC)
Hi, this is Zack Smith -- I'd like to apologize for the misquotes. There were a lot of comments flying fast and furious, and in my effort to convey as much of the panel as possibly, I probably misunderstood some of the things that were said. So I tried condensing some parts together and writing other parts out, and it appears to have still resulted in a lot of confusion.

This was my first year covering panels, and while I've done some town meetings in the past, I've never tried doing an intellectual discussion such as this. I'm baffled as to how some people seem to get every major point of a panel...I apologize for the inaccuracies, and I don't think I'll try to cover a panel of this type in the future.
Aug. 8th, 2007 08:41 pm (UTC)
oh Zack! Don't get me wrong! I thought your sum up was great! It must have been nearly impossible to distill into an article. I just wanted to clarify because it sounded a bit weird out of context!

I apologize to you if I made you feel badly!

It is an interesting discussion, and one that I hope to have for many, many years!

I thik your sum up provides a great place for debate!
Aug. 9th, 2007 03:04 am (UTC)
You didn't make me feel bad, Cecil -- but I certainly feel bad that my summary of this misinterpreted statements from most of the participants. You all were saying such interesting things that I made the mistake of trying to get it ALL down! It was my first year trying to live panel coverage, and while my other pieces seem to have turned out all right, I'm very embarrassed that this one had so many mistakes. I checked with Sara about her quote at the beginning before I typed it up, but I should have tried to track the rest of you down before the article ran.

Again, my apologies to everyone who was on the panel.
Aug. 8th, 2007 04:23 pm (UTC)
I think I have a much broader idea of what is "literature" than most people.

(My definition of poetry is: text that is left-justified)

In college, I put Harlequin romances and science fiction on my list of "classic works of literature" and enjoyed the arguments that broke out as a result. I don't know that I convinced anyone about anything but that I could argue well.

But . . .

To me, comics are obviously literature, though they are not only literature. Sort of like Dada is literature and you have to read it to understand the literature of that period, but you have to expand your mind and be able to "read" art, as well, to get it.
Aug. 8th, 2007 08:12 pm (UTC)
You have to watch out for those journalists....!
( 11 comments — Leave a comment )


Miss Cecil Castellucci

Latest Month

December 2013

Cecil's Books

Cecil Castellucci's books on Goodreads

The Plain JanesThe Plain Janes
reviews: 330
ratings: 1934 (avg rating 3.65)

Boy ProofBoy Proof
reviews: 86
ratings: 849 (avg rating 3.59)

Janes in LoveJanes in Love
reviews: 102
ratings: 536 (avg rating 3.62)

reviews: 97
ratings: 566 (avg rating 3.67)

The Queen of CoolThe Queen of Cool
reviews: 34
ratings: 323 (avg rating 3.39)

Powered by