Art Driven or Word Driven?

In some of the fora I've come across, a lot of aspiring comics creators seem to be more art-driven than word-driven. This is understandable, since comics by popular perception is a visual medium.

When I started out, however, I didn't place as much importance in art as I did story. Yes, I do believe that art can make or break a graphic novel, but I thought that if I devoted more energy to the art side and scrimped on the story side, what was my business making graphic novels in the first place? I didn't want to make book filled with just pretty pictures.

If there's one thing I envy about writers is the convenience they have. They can write anywhere! They can write a scene on a paper napkin while having a piñacolada in some South American beachfront. They can revise and finalize wherever an inspiration hits them, even while taking a dump. But the comics artist? No such luck. Unless you're the avant-garde graphic novelist who publishes everything on paper napkins.

My work right now, however, is more art-driven since that's how I really started out. Getting into the discipline of storycrafting is a current passion of mine. I mean, I've tasted some success with my previous work, but I was working mostly on instinct. Now, I'm actually studying storycrafting while continuously honing my art skills. It's a schizophrenic experience which I believe will rewarding in the end.

So to the graphic novelist who reads this--are you more art driven or word driven? Do you feel the need for balance--excellence in both fields?

A Graphic Novel A Year

Who doesn't want to make a graphic novel a year? I certainly would want to. I've been reading Karen Weisner's First Draft in 30 Days, a book for novel writers, and I thought, "Why can't graphic novelists join the fun?" Weisner's book is about coming up with a draft, not a full novel. A draft is something that can conceivably be achieved in the span of a month, since the document is far from being styled, cleaned up, and polished.

In a previous post, I proposed a "program" for the graphic novelist, in which he'll spend a year developing material for the next four years. I wasn't sure if it was possible since I've been wrestling with my own project. But Weisner's book was good inspiration, so perhaps the "one graphic novel a year" idea may just work.

Another inspiration is Blake Snyder's Save the Cat: The Last Book On Screewriting You'll Ever Need. The book has drawn a lot of flak because it appears to promote the formulaic film. But Snyder follows the book up with a sequel Save the Cat! Goes to the Movies: The Screenwriter's Guide to Every Story Ever Told, wherein he proves that most successful movies, from Saw to Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, have a formula. The formula is in the structure, summarized by Snyder in "15 beats," which is wholly unnoticed by moviegoers. What makes each film unique can be found in the style and execution.

Weisner's book is more challenging to follow, however, because her system is worksheet based. But I understand that she had to do this because she was working with the 30-day frame. Snyder's book is more an overview of story structure among other things. So having these two books (or other similar references) can help graphic novelists speed things up.

Like I've said before, there are huge differences between graphic novels, prose novels, and screenplays, but they all have one objective--to tell a compelling story. The execution may be different, but their bare bones have a lot in common.

Art for the Commercial Graphic Novel

Last night, I was thinking in my usual over-analytical mode of the anti-social sort. I sat in the kitchen and thought out loud--a typical conversation with myself. And the topic at hand concerned art style.

What kind of art style would the commercial graphic novel have to help boost its chances of success? As I pondered on this question, the word+image concept popped into my mind.

The graphic novel in question should have art that would satisfy the taste of its intended audience, the same way that its story ought to be written.

Would Jim Lee's style give justice to a romantic comedy? Would James Kochalka's style work for a swords and sorcery epic? Arguably, they could. But the popular manga style apparently didn't work for Marvel comics, so there must be something about art style that should figure into the whole commercial graphic novel idea. (As a side note, I used to think that every Wonder Woman fan adored Adam Hughes' rendition of our dear superheroine, but I've read in a forum that there are a few who thought otherwise.)

This reminds me of a friend of mine who writes great dark fantasy stories. I told him that maybe he ought to try other kinds of stories--like stuff for kids. Surely a talented writer could easily write a short children's story. Well, he tried it, and it didn't work. The story he wrote had all the trappings of his dark fantasy style, albeit using less words in his sentences. It didn't occur to me then that writers had a default style, a methodology they're most comfortable with, a distinct way they interpreted their view of the world. The same way that Mariah Carey is best doing RnB, and Fall Out Boy doing rock.

So the commercial graphic novel should not only carry a commercially-viable story, but also commercially-appealing art, an art style that matches the mood and nuances of the story to be told. The Jim Lee style is perfect for superheroes, but I find it hard imagining its effectivity in a period British war story, at least in the eyes of the general public.

Who do I think would make great artists for the commercial graphic novel? Adam Hughes, Bryan Hitch, Brian Bolland, Paolo Serpieri, Jackson Guice, Greag Land, Alan Davis, Mark Schultz, George Perez, Phil Jimenez, and all artists whose styles tend towards the more realistic. They can make characters act and express emotions that resemble real life.

And when a story resembles real life, yet still hinges on the fantastic, it would have an easier time connecting to a large audience. It would be easier to sell.

Giving the Graphic Novel a Step Up

I would often wonder why the graphic novel hasn't really made any great strides of late. Sure, many say that the form has reached "legit art" status, but how does that translate to the real world? I'm still waiting for news on a graphic novel that has captured the fancy of a sizeable portion of the populace, not because the work is "important," but because it is vastly meaningful as well as entertaining. The kind of book that people can't help but talk about. The book that mysteriously goads people into telling their friends, "You have GOT to get this book!"

Now I've only read a few non-superhero graphic novels (Blankets, Stuck Rubber Baby, Maus, Midnight Nation), so my views may not hold a lot of water, but the one possibly irrefutable issue against the graphic novel is the price. Graphic novels are expensive! They're more expensive than a movie and a snack combined. A lot of them are more expensive than hardcover novels.

What exacerbates this issue is content, and I refer to the complexity of plot, richness of the writing, and the appeal of the art. I'm also referring to the re-read and pass-on value. In short, how many graphic novels out there are actually worth the price they ask for? Even if I were an enthusiast, I would be hard-pressed to shell out over $15 for a book I could potentially read and absorb in less than an hour. Though the financial aspects of producing a graphic novel would really jack up the retail price, I'd still like to get enough bang for my hard-earned buck.

The best comparison I can think of right now is the novel-turned-film. And we've heard countless times how movie adaptations can't hold a candle against the original material. Movies don't have the luxury of time to cram a 300-page novel into less than two hours of screentime. It is, however, easier to adapt a 100-page graphic novel. Worse, it's easier to add plot and character elements, even enrich the script, that can give the movie adaptation greater depth than the original 100-pager can hope to have.

The worst part would be when people say the movie is richer than the original book. And watching the resulting movie is even cheaper. Ouch.

So the graphic novelist has to work extra hard to deliver a story that won't just satisfy the artistic palate, especially if he intends to pursue this as a career. The product has to feel like a novel, story-wise. It has to have the ingredients, depth, scope, intricacy, and intensity of the common novel. The art and story have to be able to connect viscerally, as well as provide entertainment, to the average reader. It has to be able to stand on its own two--ummm--covers. It has to justify the price tag.

Now if there's a graphic novel out there that satisfies the above criteria, do tell me. I'd really would like to read it, sarcasm not intended.