Manga as fine literature?

[Jack Zodiac]

Y'know, I've been thinking about this all day. My girlfriend asked me before I went to work, "Can you think of any manga that could be considered as literature, like The Sandman is to comics?"

And I thought about it for a while. A lot of manga that continue on for volumes and volumes are generally shonen manga, so they're more likened to action comic books than anything else. Even really good shonen manga like Rurouni Kenshin and InuYasha, both of which have really deep storylines and characters, are generally more like American comic books in regards to action and comedy versus drama.

She said Angel Sanctuary, but I never read that before and I don't plan on it any time soon. So I was wondering what you guys thought were some good examples of manga as fine literature. Maybe it'll give us both some new stuff to look for.

[Buzz Dixon]

Well, the first step would be to define what we mean by "literature." Depending on where the benchmark is set, almost anything on paper can be considered literature.

Genre or category fiction is not automatically excluded from the eralms of literature, but too often the conventions of certain genres make it difficult for the author to overcome artificial limitations. LONE WOLF & CUB, for example, is a superlative manga, offers wonderful insights into the workings of the lower strate of Japanese society, raises some interesting moral and ethical paradoxes. Does it rise to the rank of "literature"? One might argue that despite the wonderfully detailed complexity around him, Itto Ogami remains a pretty monodimensional character, a relentless killing machine whose answer to everything is a whack with the sword.

Conversely, BAREFOOT GEN shows an entire family in marvelous detail, full of layers of complexity and contradiction. BAREFOOT GEN definitely falls into the literature category despite the deceptively simple and child-like style of the art.

I would add the work of Yoshihiro Tatsumi to the literature column as well. His collection GOOD-BYE has some pretty heart-rending stories. The situations are almost melodramatic, but the characters desplay a depth of humanity not usually found in most stories of this type.

[Ghost]

I haven't read it myself, but I've seen Akira be cited as "considered by many to be the finest work of graphic fiction ever created."

[chojinlocke]

I would have to cast my vote for Nausicaa. If Tolkien can be counted, and certainly if Sandman is literature, Nausicaa should be there. I think the 7 volume edition that Viz put out a couple of years ago should be on the shelf of anyone who calls themselves a fan of manga. But, opinions vary. I would through Tezuka's Phoenix and Buddah in there. I'm sure I am omitting tons of worthy books, and certainly hundreds that haven't even been translated.

I'm looking forward to more definition and even more recommendations! I'll be checking this thread often!

[The Mirrorball Man]

It depends on your definition of literature. According to mine, no manga belong in the "literature" category. They're comics.

Now if you're asking for quality comics from Japan, there are lots of them. How about starting with one of my favorites, Jiro Taniguchi's "Aruku Hito"?

[Jack Zodiac]

It depends on your definition of literature. According to mine, no manga belong in the "literature" category. They're comics.

Okay, this is pretty to-the-point. What I mean by "manga as fine literature" is, what manga would you fill in the blank with?

"The Sandman is to comic books what blank is to manga."

[Smokeyjay]

I've read some pretty deep manga, but they tend to be more "one-shot" mangas, consisting of only a single volume.

Nothing to the extent of Sandman, which ran for several volumes.

I thought Angel Sanctuary was terrible. I think many manga readers do as well. I could only read 1 volume before I quit. I remember a lot of people agreeing that it was a bad manga.

Its hard to find a manga I feel that is similar to Sandman because manga and comics aren't exactly the same.

But 20th century boys does have shades of Watchmen the comic book. I suggest you go download it. Then stop halfway, because the author tends to ruin it by dragging out the story.

What do you mean exactly by "Sandman is to comics" exactly? As the definitive comic? As the best comic? As a fantasy genre?

[rick]

I'm not a huge manga fan, but I did recently finish Osamu Tezuka's masterpiece, Buddha and it absolutly should count as fine literature.

[Jack Zodiac]

What do you mean exactly by "Sandman is to comics" exactly? As the definitive comic? As the best comic? As a fantasy genre?

The Sandman is critically acclaimed as being on par with classic literature, yet it is a comic book. It's even won an award that is now exclusive to prose literature (the rule was changed after Gaiman won the award) for the issue that depicted the "true" account of A Midsummer Night's Dream.

So, The Sandman is the "fine literature" of comics. What is the "fine literature, or The Sandman of manga. Length has nothing to do with it, just how well-written and deep the manga is.

[Inkthinker]

I think Vagabond would fit the criteria, whatever they are. So would Miyazaki's Nausicaa.

[The Mirrorball Man]

Okay, this is pretty to-the-point. What I mean by "manga as fine literature" is, what manga would you fill in the blank with?

"The Sandman is to comic books what blank is to manga."
Yeah, that's why added the second line, which answers this question.

[Sanagi]

Nausicaa is probably my favorite story in any art form.

[Sandoz]

I agree with Angel Sanctuary (which is admitedly a series one has to be patient with, since the first two volumes pale in comparison to the story arcs that follow), Akira, Nausicaa, and Buddha. I would also consider Osamu Tezuka's epic Phoenix series as fine literature, along with Kaori Miro's Emma (a period piece about forbidden love in Victorian England, which has been compared to the works of Jane Austen or the Bronte sisters.)

[Yun Lao]

Indeed, Angel Sanctuary starts to get interesting around the third volume I believe. Besides that and Miyazaki's works, I believe that as long as the manga doesn't circle around the usual action driven plot (Hero fights one boss, then has to go find some way of getting stronger for the next one,) they could be.

[Smokeyjay]

Ok, I'll give Angel Sanctuary a second chance.

[The Xenos]

Well the trouble is you have you Neil Gaiman and you also have your Alan Moore. I don't know if there are exact counterparts, but I get what you mean by more literate. What manga has a more classical and just plain classy take on the medium. While many other comics and manga go for more fun and pulp, some books are worthy to be taught in an English class.

Tezuka's Buddha sounds like it fits. His Phoenix sounds quite metaphysical (and rather like the best Grant Morrison). Though I confress to not getting either yet save for a preview of Phoenix. I need to read Miyazaki's Nausicaa manga as well.

I want to say Berserk, in comparison to Tolkien, but I think Berserk can be a bit too pulpy at times. Then again, at other times it feels epic like Tolkien and dramatically tragic like good Shakespeare.

Of course another problem with Berserk, and with many other manga, is that they are serial literature. They can go on for dozens of volumes. Most 'literature' and stuff taught in classes are done much sooner and take up far less space on your shelf.

[chojinlocke]

I thought of Berserk as well, but it is a bit pulpy. I liken it more to Conan or Tarzan. Most manga leans more to that vein IMO. Most comics fit there from all over the world, for that matter.

If Brave New World and The Time Machine can be literature, and we are allowing comics to be counted among works such as that, I would say Phoenix definitely fits.

Hmm... I just go Emma #1 recently, I haven't had a chance to read it yet.

Good to hear from you again xenos!

[Buzz Dixon]

Of course another problem with Berserk, and with many other manga, is that they are serial literature.Most of what Dickens wrote was serial literature, too. That's why some of his books drag on and on and on and are filled with jaw dropping coicindences: He was getting paid by the word and would only be inspired to think of an ending when his publisher told him the readers were getting bored.

Plotwise, Dickens is tedious, but his astonishing gift for character more than made up for it.

[Ghost]

Besides that and Miyazaki's works, I believe that as long as the manga doesn't circle around the usual action driven plot (Hero fights one boss, then has to go find some way of getting stronger for the next one,) they could be.

So, you're saying that standard Shonen can't be considered fine literature, but that standard Shojo, Seinen, harem comedies, magical girl manga, etc, can be? :rolleyes: :p

[Sanagi]

So, you're saying that standard Shonen can't be considered fine literature, but that standard Shojo, Seinen, harem comedies, magical girl manga, etc, can be? :rolleyes: :p
No one here is even remotely trashing the whole shonen genre, just the shallower examples of it. So keep your rolled eyes to yourself.

[Smokeyjay]

What about Basara?

http://www.aicoalition.com/manga.php I don't think its licensed, so heres a dl for you to check.

I think its quite good. One of my top ten mangas. I don't acutally consider it as fine literature, because when I think of fine literature, I think of classics that stood the test of time.

[Ed Cunard]

I'll echo some of the other replies:


Buddha (http://www.amazon.com/Kapilavastu-Buddha-Vol-Osamu-Tezuka/dp/1932234438/sr=8-1/qid=1160487015/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-1631883-6729501?ie=UTF8&s=books), Osamu Tezuka.
The Push Man and Other Stories (http://www.amazon.com/Push-Man-Other-Stories/dp/1896597858/sr=8-1/qid=1160487074/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-1631883-6729501?ie=UTF8), Yoshihiro Tatsumi
The Times of Botchan (http://www.amazon.com/Times-Botchan-1-10/dp/8496427013/sr=8-1/qid=1160487157/ref=sr_1_1/104-1631883-6729501?ie=UTF8&s=books), Jiro Taniguchi and Natsuo Sekikawa.

[Jonathan Bogart]

I'll echo some of the other replies:


Buddha (http://www.amazon.com/Kapilavastu-Buddha-Vol-Osamu-Tezuka/dp/1932234438/sr=8-1/qid=1160487015/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-1631883-6729501?ie=UTF8&s=books), Osamu Tezuka.
The Push Man and Other Stories (http://www.amazon.com/Push-Man-Other-Stories/dp/1896597858/sr=8-1/qid=1160487074/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-1631883-6729501?ie=UTF8), Yoshihiro Tatsumi
The Times of Botchan (http://www.amazon.com/Times-Botchan-1-10/dp/8496427013/sr=8-1/qid=1160487157/ref=sr_1_1/104-1631883-6729501?ie=UTF8&s=books), Jiro Taniguchi and Natsuo Sekikawa.

All of which are way more deserving of the "literature" tag than (good grief) Sandman.

[swinebread]

I'm gonna go with:

Samurai Executioner by Kazuo Koike

Lady Snowblood by Kazuo Kokie

Adolf: A Tale of the Twentieth Century by Osamu Tezuka

Uzumaki series by Junji Ito

Eagle: The Making of an Asian American President by Kaiji Kawaguchi

...and yes Barefoot Gen.

[Ghost]

No one here is even remotely trashing the whole shonen genre, just the shallower examples of it. So keep your rolled eyes to yourself.

You misunderstand. My rolled eyes were due to the fact that he completely missed the shallower examples of all the other genres, which are often just as bad as the shonen ones.

[The Xenos]

Ooo. There's an old Viz series called 2001 Nights that is an amazing hard Sci Fi epic. It's a bunch of short stories that tell the advancement of human space travel. It's inspired by Arthur C Clark and somewhat the story structure of 1001 Nights , hence the title.

Also, on the subject of Hard SF, Planetes is pretty amazing. Both of those by their science alone are good literature. Though the charcters, storytelling, and themes are also well done.

I'm hesitant to mention Blame!, even when talking about Hard SF. Blame kinda gets pretty far out and weird. I love it, but it's really not for everyone. In a film analygoy, it's more David Lynch than Coppola or Hitchcock. It's more of a cult favorite than mainstream classic. Though if you think Lynch should be considered a master filmmaker, then I guess Blame! could be considered literature manga. It's like David Lynch meets Matrix or Blade Runner. It's definately more far out and far future than, say, William Gibson's more down to Earth cyberpunk.

[The Xenos]

Upon reading a review (http://www.aintitcool.com/node/30329) (at AICN of all places) of a Tezuka book, I was reminded of the term 'Gekiga'. The review said the book was considered gekiga, not manga. This was a movement in manga to be more mature and not just goofy comics. It can be seen as similar to Eisner and those who wanted some comics called graphic novels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gekiga
(btw, the references for the article are quite good)

This reminds me somewhat of what we've been talking about here.

Also, when Tokyopop talks about manga being global and the term 'global manga', do they note that manga can inherntly be translated as "irresponsible pictures"? Of course not. They want to hype up a fake definition they half made up for the term 'manga'. Tokyopop wants to make popular books to sell, not good books. If you ask me, graphic novel is more apropriate to the American stuff Tokyopop makes. Though most of those 'global manga' books have the quality of an amateur small press comic book or even an amateur webcomic.

[chojinlocke]

If you ask me, graphic novel is more apropriate to the American stuff Tokyopop makes. Though most of those 'global manga' books have the quality of an amateur small press comic book or even an amateur webcomic.

Look man, I dig your posts and we have really similar tastes in manga. Overall I think you are cool, I even understand some of your beefs with Tpop. However, is it too much to ask to have ONE thread here that doesn't devolve into this? I know how you feel and we've been through this a million times, I can't make you like my book or any of the other "insert what you want to call them" books that Tpop or Seven Seas or whoever puts out, but it really doesn't lend anything to either the:

A) discussion of the criteria of manga as literature
B) debating the pros and cons of what manga would fit this criteria

I don't want to sound harsh, but this debate always seems to come up, I just don't see the relevance here. Especially since no one has mentioned ANY "insert what you want to call them" books.


On the good side, 2001 nights was really super cool. you are totally right on that one. It is totally an Asimov kind of book. I wish I had the complete run, instead of just a couple of random issues. I thought of those books when I first picked up Planetes. There is a new super thick book in that same vein
http://www.darkhorse.com/profile/profile.php?sku=13-662
I just saw this weekend. Looks cool. I don't know if either of these would be considered literature. (I guess I am off topic as well , my apologies)
Classics to me don't always mean quality (I mean, I am usually bored to tears by the Time Machine, and most Dickens, but I do dig The Invisible Man, Frankenstein, and Dracula).

Anyone else want to take a stab at what criteria should be used, or do you think no comic will be (or should be) classified as literature.
For example, I think Eagle is BRILLIANT but if it is literature, I think Grisham novels would have to be considered as well, I think Berserk is awesome and epic, but leans towards pulp.

I really am enjoying this thread for the most part!

[Jonathan Bogart]

Anyone else want to take a stab at what criteria should be used, or do you think no comic will be (or should be) classified as literature.
For example, I think Eagle is BRILLIANT but if it is literature, I think Grisham novels would have to be considered as well, I think Berserk is awesome and epic, but leans towards pulp.
Sure, I'll take a whack at it.

First, it depends on what we mean by the word "literature." Is it merely a description of a medium? (This is the old high-school English-class definition, where literature divided into the three "genres" of drama, poetry and prose. If this is what we mean, then no comic is literature; Comics is its own medium, distinct from both Literature and Fine Art.) In this mode, as long as it's text, it's literature; this means everything from Homer and Shakespeare to grade-Z fan-fiction.

Or do we use "literature" merely as an honorific, to mean "this is good" or "this is what I like" or "this is something a lot of people have said is good" or even just "this reminds me of what I'm used to thinking of as literature"?

Or do we use it to mean a specific kind of narrative (which is what most people in this thread seem to be doing), a narrative which is complex in order to deal with complex topics, addressing serious, grown-up issues in a serious, grown-up manner, with both thematic and narrative coherence, and perhaps less emphasis on action, melodrama, or other genre elements than is usual in any popular medium?

I don't really favor any of these definitions of literature; the least vague (the first) is also the least useful when talking about comics, and the others are too broad to be helpful without first defining our terms. The last one seems to work at first glance, but too often it's used as a snobbish stick to beat whatever doesn't measure up (in anyone's given opinion) to the standard. (Which is what I did when I dissed Sandman upthread.) The popular/literary dichotomy is false, anway; the perspective of history always makes the difference vanishingly small.

The manga I like to read tends to be quieter, more introspective stuff, like Tatsumi and Taniguchi and the mature Tezuka. That fits in with my taste in Western comics and other media as well. One of the words used to describe that sort of thing is "literary," but since this kind of work can often be wordless, or nearly so, that seems unsatisfactory to me as a definitive statement.

One last point: since the idea of literature is so closely tied to the written word, it can be difficult to judge manga fairly on that basis from this side of the Pacific, especially since translations can so easily be shoddy, inaccurate, or simply tone-deaf. There's lots of manga that people have told me is excellent that I simply can't read, because I can't handle the dull, expressionless translatorese that's used as a substitute for actual English. But I'm a hardcore writing geek; a lot of people aren't afflicted in that way.

[Yun Lao]

So, you're saying that standard Shonen can't be considered fine literature, but that standard Shojo, Seinen, harem comedies, magical girl manga, etc, can be? :rolleyes: :p

To be honest, at that moment I was stating the most reoccuring plot structure that popped in my mind, and that I had forgotten many of the others. For that I apologize.

[chojinlocke]

One last point: since the idea of literature is so closely tied to the written word, it can be difficult to judge manga fairly on that basis from this side of the Pacific, especially since translations can so easily be shoddy, inaccurate, or simply tone-deaf. There's lots of manga that people have told me is excellent that I simply can't read, because I can't handle the dull, expressionless translatorese that's used as a substitute for actual English. But I'm a hardcore writing geek; a lot of people aren't afflicted in that way.

That is a good point that I hadn't thought about. I think translations in general have gotten a lot better over the years. However, it is still hard to tell sometimes since I don't read Japanese well, and can't compare A to B.

[Ghost]

To be honest, at that moment I was stating the most reoccuring plot structure that popped in my mind, and that I had forgotten many of the others. For that I apologize.

That's okay, it's an easy mistake to make. What gets to me is when people honestly seem to assume that shonen is the standard of all manga.


One last point: since the idea of literature is so closely tied to the written word, it can be difficult to judge manga fairly on that basis from this side of the Pacific, especially since translations can so easily be shoddy, inaccurate, or simply tone-deaf. There's lots of manga that people have told me is excellent that I simply can't read, because I can't handle the dull, expressionless translatorese that's used as a substitute for actual English. But I'm a hardcore writing geek; a lot of people aren't afflicted in that way.

Heh, "translatorese." :)

And you make a valid point. Especially since, from what I can tell, Japanese is a very nuanced language.

[The Xenos]

Look man, I dig your posts and we have really similar tastes in manga. Overall I think you are cool, I even understand some of your beefs with Tpop. However, is it too much to ask to have ONE thread here that doesn't devolve into this? I know how you feel and we've been through this a million times, I can't make you like my book or any of the other "insert what you want to call them" books that Tpop or Seven Seas or whoever puts out, but it really doesn't lend anything to either the:

A) discussion of the criteria of manga as literature
B) debating the pros and cons of what manga would fit this criteria

I don't want to sound harsh, but this debate always seems to come up, I just don't see the relevance here. Especially since no one has mentioned ANY "insert what you want to call them" books.

Sorry about that, my rather constant rant from another thread (or two or three) bled over here. My mind was on terminology again and I tried to slide the 'Gekiga' idea over to Tokyopop's comments about manga. I was just wondering, why can't Tokyopop try to promote this more diverse terminology. Seeing the article on gekiga reminded me how odd it is to instantly call things manga. Though that really was a tangent and a piss poor way to end the post.

Also, I seem to have been too harsh on all Tokyopop books. Only a couple seemed inapropriate for the full volume format and looked more like webcomics. Surely a number are decent books, on par with manga. Though I don't think of any fitting that 'Gekiga' definition. Most seem to aim for the more fantastic setting. There really isn't anything wrong with that. With gekiga, from what little I know, it was supposed to be down to Earth human stories. Then again, I don't think most manga fits this gekiga attempt by Tezuka anyway. Nor are most comics fitting of the graphic novel idea Will Eisner had. Heh. Both Tezuka and Eisner helped form comics into what they are today and they both tried to lift the bar, but how many manga fans and comic fans even know their names?



On the good side, 2001 nights was really super cool. you are totally right on that one. It is totally an Asimov kind of book. I wish I had the complete run, instead of just a couple of random issues. I thought of those books when I first picked up Planetes. There is a new super thick book in that same vein
http://www.darkhorse.com/profile/profile.php?sku=13-662
I just saw this weekend. Looks cool. I don't know if either of these would be considered literature. (I guess I am off topic as well , my apologies)
Classics to me don't always mean quality (I mean, I am usually bored to tears by the Time Machine, and most Dickens, but I do dig The Invisible Man, Frankenstein, and Dracula).

I found 2001 Nights on Amazon.com. It actually was through a secondary distributor, but it was listed on the main amazon site.

What's interesting about 'The Two Faces of Tomorrow' is that it's an adapation of an American "classic science-fiction novel".

As for Frankenstein, Dracula, Time Machine and others. Yeah, I read a couple and they were dry. Though now that I'm older I'd like to take a stab at 20,000 Leagues again, because I love the story from numerous adaptations I've seen.


Anyone else want to take a stab at what criteria should be used, or do you think no comic will be (or should be) classified as literature.
For example, I think Eagle is BRILLIANT but if it is literature, I think Grisham novels would have to be considered as well, I think Berserk is awesome and epic, but leans towards pulp.

Well, who knows what will be looked back at as classic literature. Shakespere was a poor playwright creating plays for entertainment. Now it's being read in English classes. Which is sad, because they're meant to be seen on stage. Thankfully, in highschool we watched videos and even went to see Ma.. the Scottish play on stage. Of course, when MacDuff beheads the main character (spoilers!) they actually had blood fly off the ax into an aise before he came down for the second and final chop. Now THAT is classic literature. Heh.

Also, comics/manga are relatively new. Printing technology couldn't quite handle full volumes of pictures like this when most 'classics' were published. Only in the past century has the format really taken off around the world. Of course, now with web publishing and computer aided art and publishing tricks, the whole publishing indutry and how artists break out is totally different.

I think you could compare it to video games. People don't want to admit this new medium is on par with books. Of course, even I don't know if they are or should be. They are rather different experiences, particularly video games. Though I'd certinly say some games are better than some books. (I'm looking at you 'A Separate Piece' by John Knowles!)


Actually I thought of another series that could come close to 'Gekiga'. Lament of the Lamb. It has a very realistic on vampirism and is basically a family drama. Also the depictions of people and actions remind me of how geika was described.

Geez, Monster. How did that one slip my mind! Again, the trouble is that it's serial fiction, so it doesn't read like normal classic literature. It goes on for volumes. It's almost like a TV show. Then again, can a TV show be on par with 'classic litierature'? Then again, Sherlock Holmes was published serially, right?

Also, some older books by Kazuo Koike and or Ryoichi Ikegami come to mind. A friend recommended Sancurary to me and I could only unfortunately find the first volume. Then again, Both Koike and Ikegami soemtimes devled a bit into 'fanservice' and pulpy sex scenes.

Then again we have Hamlet talking about Opelia's country matters, so even the classics have crude sexual inuendo and scenes. Let's not even get into Oscar Wilde.

Also, according to that article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gekiga), "As a result of Tezuka adopting gekiga styles and storytelling, there was an acceptance of a wide diversity of experimental stories into the mainstream comic market commonly referred to critics as being the Golden Age of Manga. This started in the 1970s and continued into the 1980s. It gradually ended as mainstream shōnen magazines became increasingly more commercialized. More recently the most mainstream shōnen publications have lost a lot of gekiga influence and these kinds of works are now found in slightly more underground publications (usually seinen magazines)."

So more mature manga gave way to more immature and lighter manga aimed at kids. Though there are still certinaly mature seinen manga out there. I recently saw an interview on BBC documentary Japanorama which pointed out that Koike is now creating a gold manga for a gold magazine. Not that it's classic literature, but it's certainly aimed at an older audience.

[chojinlocke]

oh man, I don't have much time, I'm about to head to band practice. Holy Moley, making through 20,000 leagues is not something I feel like doing any time soon. D-R-Y, for me anyway. I still think it is cool to read, because it was prophetic on so many things. I guess maybe I just prefer pulp stuff. Like you said though, maybe I am just the target audience Shakespear was writing for at the time. :)

Good points man!

[Sambo253]

I wanted to 2nd the suggestion of Tezuka's Adolf.

I finished it recently, and it is one of the finest comics I've ever read. Tezuka's mastery of the craft of storytelling is unparalled.

I also agree that we need to look at what makes something "literate." I'm always very impressed by the level of reserach that manga-ka love to show off in their comics. You can learn somewhat practical information from Gunsmith Cats and Iron Wok Jan

What separates The Odyssey and One Piece? They're both epic adventures in scale. Is it the use of language?

[The Xenos]

What separates The Odyssey and One Piece? They're both epic adventures in scale. Is it the use of language?

Oh... I'd say a thousands and hundreds of years of people talking about it and keeping the fandom.

If I remember correctly, Star Trek bombed when it first aired. It eventually gained a cult following and is now 'classic' television and science fiction televition.

Again, I'm reminded of Sherlock Holmes. I belive it was a serial fiction published in a magazine like manga and comics are. It gained a following. Now Sherlock Holmes is considered classic literature. Heck, we even got a hit TV show today based on him. I hear House is based on Holmes.

HP Lovecraft also comes to mind. He wrote pulp novels. Not even. He wrote in magazines too I think. Now people look back to him and call his stuff literature. Meanwhile, while the guy was alive he didn't get much fanfare and I don't think he died that famous or reconized in his field.

Speaking of pulp, Indiana Jones. Not only is there the question if Raiders is a classic film like some books are classic literature. I'm reminded of a line from it. "Look at this. It's worthless - ten dollars from a vendor in the street. But I take it, I bury it in the sand for a thousand years, it becomes priceless. Like the Ark."

If something is preserved and talked about for long enough, it will become classic.

Let's see what and how popular or pulpy manga now is talked about years from now. Let's see what and how manga with cult following now is talked aobut years from now. Then we'll see what is considered literature and what is considered junk.

[Aaron Kashtan]

Sure, I'll take a whack at it.

First, it depends on what we mean by the word "literature." Is it merely a description of a medium? (This is the old high-school English-class definition, where literature divided into the three "genres" of drama, poetry and prose. If this is what we mean, then no comic is literature; Comics is its own medium, distinct from both Literature and Fine Art.) In this mode, as long as it's text, it's literature; this means everything from Homer and Shakespeare to grade-Z fan-fiction.

Or do we use "literature" merely as an honorific, to mean "this is good" or "this is what I like" or "this is something a lot of people have said is good" or even just "this reminds me of what I'm used to thinking of as literature"?

Or do we use it to mean a specific kind of narrative (which is what most people in this thread seem to be doing), a narrative which is complex in order to deal with complex topics, addressing serious, grown-up issues in a serious, grown-up manner, with both thematic and narrative coherence, and perhaps less emphasis on action, melodrama, or other genre elements than is usual in any popular medium?

I don't really favor any of these definitions of literature; the least vague (the first) is also the least useful when talking about comics, and the others are too broad to be helpful without first defining our terms. The last one seems to work at first glance, but too often it's used as a snobbish stick to beat whatever doesn't measure up (in anyone's given opinion) to the standard. (Which is what I did when I dissed Sandman upthread.) The popular/literary dichotomy is false, anway; the perspective of history always makes the difference vanishingly small.

YOU GET IT! The point you're implicitly making-- that "literature" is a very broad term with multiple conflicting meanings, and that we should therefore be very careful about applying it to comics-- is a point that I feel quite strongly about. The term "literature" means both "text-based art" and "text-based art that is culturally privileged," and when people use "literature" to refer to comics, they almost always forget that it means both these things.

[The Xenos]

Howsabout we use the term 'fine literature'? For example, stuff that would be used in an English class? Perhaps since we're talking liteally graphic literature, maybe even consider serious design classes. (David Mack comes to mind on the comics side.)

Now I don't know about 'fine literature', but I was just reading me some Deathnote and I keep saying that book reminds me of a good Hitchcock film meeting a Rod Serling TV ep. Now I belive both of those are considered classic in their field. Of course, it will be a few years before we see what manga published now is still remembered and considered good down the line.

[Jack Zodiac]

Yes, by "fine literature" I mean anything that would represent the most impressive work in this medium. Like The Sandman, which is often described as one of the finest works in comic book history. And I've gotten a lot of great suggestions from this thread, guys, so thank you very much. I've read quite a few of them, and heard of most of the others suggested, but I think Nausicaa and Buddha sound like books I'd be interested in, so I'll look for those first.

[genesis]

As mentioned earlier I would say Deathnote would be an example, not sure how "fine" it is, but it is a great piece of literature. With the moral complexity of what Light is doing plus what L is trying to do, all wrapped up in a nice thrilling suspenseful mystery. Yeah Deathnote gets my vote.

[Sambo253]

I'd like to suggest the works of Jiro Taniguchi.

I was reading that his "The Times of Botchan" is regarded as one of the great literary works of manga in Japan. Of course, it's not available in the US. He does have the works Icaro (done with Moebius!) and The Walking Man in the US.

[Knightosis]

Manga can be fine as literature, but really, it has to be the ones that are
very serious in story-telling and characterization.

"Adolf" is by far Literature worthy. Very deep story and plot.

[Althalus]

I was reading that his "The Times of Botchan" is regarded as one of the great literary works of manga in Japan. Of course, it's not available in the US.
Umm, wrong. It is available, at least the first volume (ISBN 8496427013 (http://www.ponentmon.com/new_pages/english/botchan/frame3.html)) is, with the second (ISBN 8496427099 (http://www.ponentmon.com/new_pages/english/botchan2/frame3.html)) coming soon. Fanfare / Ponent Mon is doing the series, so it's not cheap ($20), but it is available.


~Althalus