Permalink

Scott McCloud talks comics theory on both TED.com and The Sound of Young America

Watch as Scott McCloud explains his theories on comics. Scott is engaged and engaging and these explanations of the history of comics as a medium, his theory of the “four tribes” of comics creators, and the idea of a limitless canvas all make for a fun 15-minute primer of his first two books, Understanding Comics, and Reinventing Comics.

Also, don’t miss Scott on The Sound of Young America, my favourite podcast.

  • Oluseyi

    I don’t get it.

    As long as comics are individual frames or cells presented sequentially, what difference does the spatial orientation of adjacent elements make? An infinite canvas is somewhat convenient (albeit mostly for the author; horizontally scrolling windows are inconvenient for most users because their mouse scroll wheels only affect vertical offset), and being free to place cells in whatever position serves the dramatic purpose best is cool (e.g. the horizontal positioning of the “Pup” strip), but I don’t see any additional meaning conferred upon or possibly extracted from the work because of the abstractness of shape.

    Also, while an infinitely large page may be the abstract effect of “post-print,” in reality our viewport is still constrained by the dimensions of our monitors. And browser windows. Viewing the Pup strip, again, there are some huge, beautiful images in the sequence, but I can’t view them in entirety on my monitor, even if I set my browser to full screen. So I have to scroll vertically as well as horizontally… So far, then, the lack of constraints of post-print have only created author indulgences, with no gains for the reader.

    Anyone care to help a philosophically stunted former engineering major “get” it?

  • Oluseyi

    I don’t get it.

    As long as comics are individual frames or cells presented sequentially, what difference does the spatial orientation of adjacent elements make? An infinite canvas is somewhat convenient (albeit mostly for the author; horizontally scrolling windows are inconvenient for most users because their mouse scroll wheels only affect vertical offset), and being free to place cells in whatever position serves the dramatic purpose best is cool (e.g. the horizontal positioning of the “Pup” strip), but I don’t see any additional meaning conferred upon or possibly extracted from the work because of the abstractness of shape.

    Also, while an infinitely large page may be the abstract effect of “post-print,” in reality our viewport is still constrained by the dimensions of our monitors. And browser windows. Viewing the Pup strip, again, there are some huge, beautiful images in the sequence, but I can’t view them in entirety on my monitor, even if I set my browser to full screen. So I have to scroll vertically as well as horizontally… So far, then, the lack of constraints of post-print have only created author indulgences, with no gains for the reader.

    Anyone care to help a philosophically stunted former engineering major “get” it?