"Palestine"

first off, I feel like this comic is quite different from the others that we've read. I do like how it's set in a different atmosphere and environment than something I would normally read about. I don't know a whole lot about the Jewish/Palestinian/Arab (?) situation (surprise!...lol) but reading about something and somewhere different is refreshing. I understand that the author is a journalist, and you can definetly pick up on that in certain areas, such as pages 41-50. It resembles more of a newspaper/magazine article here than it does a comic or graphic novel. (which all the text was quite time consuming and honestly, not fun.) I also feel like the panels, and even the plot of the story is very unorganized, kind of like the notes of a journalist before his finished article or story. But, for some reason, teh way he tells the story is not like a journalist. He's not very unbiased in certain situations and toward different groups. And honestly, for some reason I havent figured out yet, I find myself not liking the autho/narrator at all. I dont know but I fnd him rude and jsut not very nice.
ps....I added a comic at the top to indicate the sort of violence and its unrealness that some moments in the book represent in this place.....

Final Project

So, this si my post for Wed. Seeing as we are focusing on our final projects I was thinking of switching things up a bit and asking for advice on it. I am doing my final project on how photgraphs may form people's opinion of a story and how they work in a graphic novel (such as "Fun Home".) Does anyone have any suggestions on how to concentrate my thesis moe on a focused point? I'm going to had several pictures to people and ask several questions, such as how they perceive them as a story or if at all. I'd look to look at the subjectivity of indivisuals and how they perceive them. I'm having trouble maybe relating back to graphic novels. I'm waiting for the brilliant lightbulb to come on over my head, but Im also waiting for someone to maybe help me turn teh ligtbub on with some stellar advice! thanks!

"Berlin"

On page 136, in the bedroom, when she is trying to draw Herr Severing, several of the panels really interest me. Some of the panels of her are blurry, almost sketch-like. Severing keeps saying he cannot see her, and he does not have his glasses on, so these panels/pictures may be from his point of view, from his eyes. He cannot see her clearly because he is not wearing his glasses. But in my opinion, the blurry pictures look more like sketches. Even though the pictures are of her, I believe they are from her as well. They are sketches, and that is what she does. She is the artist, sketching what she sees. But one thing that disturbs me, is one panel on pg. 137. It is another sketch of her, but she looks not like how the other illustrations in the book portray her. She looks angry, calculating, and honestly, evil. Maybe this si just how I perceive the picture, but that is actually what I am doing my final project on. How pictures can tell a story, how people piece the story together for themselves (thir own, individual interpertation) and how different people perceive the pictures differently. While I may look at the specific panel on page 137 as evil and malicious, others might view her as just looking stern or concentrating. That is one of the great things about comic books and the pictures they provide. The story and pictures are interperted in many different ways to each individual person who reads them.

More on "Berlin"

On page 88, the story of the family slighty confuses me. I guess I still dont understand who is who? How could the father kick the wife out? And what newspaper was she reading? One that supported the Nazis or Jewish people? And this is right before World War II and the Holocaust, correct? Isnt Adolph Hitler in charge? I guess I was expecting Germany to be in more of an uproar?

"Berlin"

After jsut reading the first couple pages of "Berlin," I already like the hitorical aspect of the story and the change of atmosphere. Since we've already seen America in catastrophe and change in "stuck rubber Baby," it will be interesting to see Europe during their time of change in 1928, right before Worl War II. I like on page 16, the usage of the diary excerpts in the panels. It makes the story more personal. While the woman's cursive writing off sets the man's (the journalist's) personal view on a type writer. I like the opposing views, the contrast of perspectives the city. The single panel on page 18 that shows the overview of the city seems tto portry the city as already overwhelming and taking over. The small details of the single panel are amazing, to the people riding bikes, the double decker buses, and even two women in the bottom right corner shaking hands.
AS the traffic conroller says, teh German people are sheep. That is why they are following the Nazis after World War I. They dont want to end up like the beggar that Marthe saw on the streets of Berlin. That is why no one is paying attention to the building of the planes, the planning of war, and the deliberate violation of the Treaty of Versialles.

Wrap up of "Fun Home"

Soooo.....I was sick all last week, so that gave me time to finish the book. I still dont like how she writes. For a graphic novel there are too many words, and reads too muchy like a novel. The pictures are very simple, which was refreshing and interesting how it connected with teh text, but most of the time I felt like I could just skip the pictures and not really miss anything connected to the story. (But dont worry, Spencer, I didnt skip the pictures....lol) Also, I did not enjoy all of her literary references to Proust. Maybe it's just me who's never read the book that she was refering to, but I couldn't make the connection. (I did like her referal to "The Importance of Being Earnest" bc I'm reading it for Eng 210, and I never would have picked up on the homosexual aspect of the play if she hadnt refered to it.) I still didnt like how at the end of the book her father's death and own sexuality was linked to hers. I think the argument of one's sexuality as hereditary is very interesting, yet, in my opinion, unfounded. One person si there own, unique, individual. And i thought it very selfish of the author to link her own unique exploration and journey with sexuality with her father's. She cannot have known everything that he went through. And I found it very selfish the way she spoke of her father's death. There is no possible way she could have known what was going through his head at the time, even if it was an accident or on purpose. And in one point in the book she finds a way to link his death with her sexuality....I found that rude and unfair.
ps....There were several panels that were WAY too graphic for my taste....