Shlaes on the Graphic Novel

We covered this yesterday, but Amity Shlaes is all over promoting her illustrated edition of The Forgotten Man.  What makes this promotion unusual is that she is not only marketing her book but defending its medium as a whole.

Shaes argues that conservatives are failing to capitalize on the popular graphic novel genre.  These books are especially popular with young people and are increasingly acceptable literary sources at schools.  Shlaes believes that conservatives have turned up their noses too quickly at this trend.

Are conservatives really being too hard on graphic novels?   Yes and no.  Illustrated editions of the classics are nothing new and are great introductions to the real thing.  I can remember illustrated versions of various classics as a child.  The Inferno, The Hobbit, and Alice in Wonderland had all been rendered with beautiful drawings by artists of all eras and styles.

The difference between these illustrated editions and the graphic novel is that in illustrated editions, the text was still the crux of the work.  Illustrated versions meant exactly that – it was the same piece of literature, but with pictures.  This is very helpful for children, who may need help comprehending the difficult prose of Shakespeare or Dante.   The goal was never to supersede the book itself.

 Graphic novels, on the other hand, take the basic plot of a book, but reduce it to comic-strip format.  This is a sweeping generalization, but from what I have seen, the graphic novel does not match a regular piece of prose in its depth and vocabulary.  An easy comparison: a movie is hardly ever as detailed or thought-provoking as the book from which is was based.

While I commend Shlaes for her new book, I’m not sure her rallying cry for the graphic novel is necessary.  Shifting the political discourse to what will always be a reduction of the original is not how to change minds.