I hope we can all agree that “graphic novel” is the dumbest term ever coined. Since when does the word novel connote “quality”? (Which is presumably what these twits are aiming for. I mean, novels have always had a graphic component, no? We can see them, after all.) Most novels are pretty goddamned horrible, aren’t they? Wacousta is a novel for christ’s sake.
In fact, from now on, I urge all pretentious douches in the comics world to rally to the banner of “Graphic Wacoustas.”
‘Comics’ is worse, but these are the 2 terms that’ve stuck. At one time, ‘graphic novel’ might’ve been used in an attempt to elevate the medium (because you well know that even a bad novel has generally been more respectable than a good comic), but I don’t think it connotes quality to most anyone now. That comics became more respected after the term came into use — when hardbacks, tpbs and collections became more prominent — suggests that the term certainly didn’t hurt, and might’ve even served its original ideological purpose (correlation doesn’t imply causation). It does serve a useful linguistic purpose to help distinguish comics based on size and binding (of course, with all the family resemblance problems in categorization apparent).
Wacousta … That’s the robot chick from the Avengers, right?
oh I know that it worked wonders with the middlebrow public Charles–I’m just saddened by that fact
but I’d be less sad if people started saying “Graphic Wacoustas” out loud whenever I’m around
I ain’t falling for no Canadian takeover of the language.
hey, that’s true–this may be my passive-aggressive patriotism rearing its ugly head at last
[...] of The Artist, and to use Campbell’s experiences as part of what might be thought of as the graphic novel movement to illustrate the broader story of the [...]