Conclusions and decoys…

Comic books. Religion.

Religion is something that a lot of people have very different opinions about.

Now how about art? Art, just like religion is something that many people have many opinions on. What does a painting/drawing/poem mean? What is the metaphore? Does anyone know other than the painter/poet? Probably not. People will analyze a painting to death. Find meaning that may not be there. Right down to the smallest detail. Why did the painter chose a sepecific color/burhs stroke? What does that represent?

Now let’s now look at comic books as an art form. They are made up of drawings/writing/story etc… So now we have a comic incorporating religion in to their art work and a whole bunch of people trying to find the reason and the meaning behind everything. The risk here is that people are going to extract meanings that are possibly non-existent.

In Neil Gaimans’s “Sandman” there are references to many religious icons. What is the importance of these characters? Did Neil Gaiman have stories that needed characters to complete or did he have the opposite? Could this comic exist without these characters? Would the stories still make sense?

Let’s say that this comic had all the same stories but with completely different characters. Would it be possible that someone would find a religious meaning to the comic on their own?

Now what if the sotries were different bt the religious characters were present? Would there be any point to the comic or would the characters be thrown arbitrarily into the comic with no logical reason for being there?

When this comic was created it is possible that both of these were true. Neil Gaiman combined his own stories with characters that already had religious backgrounds and melded this into a big mess of confusing characters and plots.  Had he created this comic with his own characters and left out the religious aspects it is also possible to assume that people would still attribute religious links to the made up characters.

Maybe Gaiman is just cutting out the middle man. What if, in purposely telling the reader, “these are the religious characters you are getting” he is taking away the option of the reader to attribute their own possibly arbitrary and likely wrong religious assumptions. In a sense he is saying “religion doesnt need to be “found”, so I will give you some random religion to keep you from adding it yourself.”

To annoy and confuse…

Does religion make comic books better and more specifically does it make Neil Gaimans, the sandman better?

At first glance(and as I had stated in a previous post) it might seem that the motives of the author, in this case Neil Gaiman, would be an important thing to consider. However, another way to look at this would be to analyse the “readers” motives. Why is the reader even reading this comic in the first place?

Is the reader aware that the comic contains religious content?

Does the reader have any previous knowledge of religion?

A logical assumption to make is that a person with religious knowledge has already formed their own opinions that will be difficult if not impossible to change.

If we ask these questions, the following scenarios will occur.

1. The reader has religious knowledge and are reading this comic because they know it has religious references.
2. The reader has religious knowledge and does not know that this comic contains religious references.
3. The reader has no knowledge of religion and does not know that this comic contains religious references.
4. The reader has no knowledge of religion and knows that this comic contains religious references.

Here are the outcomes of the corresponding scenarios.

1. The readers religious beliefs are possibly what has driven them to read this comic. They will read the comic and could agree with what has been said, not learn anything and therefore have wasted their time reading the comic. If they do not agree with the content, they will be annoyed for having wasted their time reading this comic. anyway
2. The reader has already read religious material causing them to form their own beliefs. They are blindsided by the religious content in the comic and annoyed for having to read religious material that may disagree with their beliefs that they did not chose to read.
3. Since the reader knows nothing about religion and is not aware they are going to be reading religious content in the comic, they will miss the point completely rendering it pointless and thus wasting the readers time.
4. The reader will read this comic with no previous religious knowledge and is reading this comic in order to learn something about religion. The reader will only know what the comic has told them and will be misinformed about religion.

All four of these outcomes demonstrate that religion does not belong in comics since it will only annoy or confuse the reader, depending on their intentions/previous knowledge.

Semper Fidelis

Looking back at the things we’ve discussed, I have had such a fun time picking out the small tidbits of religion within Neil Gaiman’s Sandman. This mini easter egg hunt not only challenged my personal views on the role religion plays within our culture, but has also expanded my understanding for others who might not have grown up with a religious background. In reference to religion and its role within the graphic novels, I feel that with the right talent and approach to any type of medium, be it movies, video games or books, religion has the ability to strengthen and enrich any work of fiction. I’ve always tried to never judge a book by its cover but honestly I still do sometimes because I’m more of a visual learner. I remember the first time I picked up a fresh copy of the sandman at Metropolis Comics and Toys (located at the lower level of metrotown by toys r us if anyone is interested) and the cover was really dull and morbid looking. I glanced at the back and saw (in my oppinion) the ghetto illustrations but I never would have guessed that the entire series would contain so much references to a variety of religions. Sometimes that curiousity and willingness to get ”more for my money” was the only reason why I continued to read it, that and to add my thoughts on this blog

Adding small elements of religion can also broaden our views of different cultures and religious practices. I suppose religious fanatics can’t really complain since pop. culture actually plants some of these “seeds” and it ties in with their biblical scripture from Galatians 6:7-9 which summarizes as “you reap what you sow”. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%206:7-9&version=9; In closing I just want to say a big thanks to the team. I feel very privelaged to have had the opportunity to hear your thoughts on this touchy subject so here is some food for thought: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

Semper Fi,

VictoriouSecret

An Endless garden

As mentioned from a previus posting: the imaginary place of Destiny’s garden has been noted as having a strong connection to its physical characteristics and symbolic content according to Leonora Soledad in The Sandman Papers. “Walk any path in Detiny’s garden and you will be forced to choose not once, but many times. The paths fork and divide. With each step you take in Destiny’s garden, you make a choice; and every choice determines future paths.” We begin and end with slides of Destiny’s garden in the Season of Mists.

http://www.comicoo.com/Sandman/Sandman21/html/image2.htm

http://www.comicoo.com/Sandman/Sandman28/html/image24.htm

The maze symbolizes the infinite amount of choices individuals must make throughout the course of their lifetime. Every decision branches off and suggests that the garden is situated at an intersection of time and space where there are simultaneous existences of possible realities. As master of this domain, I wonder if Destiny himself knows where each path leads to since these endless possibilites suggest a notion of infinity? Maybe this is why Destiny is constantly holding a large book that he uses as a guide to his garden? Leonora suggests the image of the book carries all things within the universe and is a mirror to the maze, they are actually one in the same. Out of all the other members of the Endless, Destiny has the qualities of being omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent. These are powers that reflect more of the God’s that people worship today and we assume that Destiny too is aware of everything that has happend or will happen. Also, Destiny’s demeanour during his appearances seems very mysterious and secretive. His cloak together with a hood masking his face looks almost identical to the spectre’s wardrobe in Wade & Ross’ Kingdom Come. Even though Jesus looks nothing like either of the two, christians have that saying that ”god works in mysterious ways” and wording it as such allows for an open interpetation to play on the idea’s of divine intervention. Resembling God he gives us the power to choose our own fate and reveals to us our paths that we create for ourselves whether they are for better or worse. He does not condemn anyone however to a “heaven or hell” since it might be out of his jurisdiction and instead leaves those matters to his siblings.

Necromancy,Revelation, Spread, Destroy, Necromancy, Revelation, Spread, Destroy…etc.

William Blake's The Last Judgement

The Antichrist within the Book of Revelation is thought to be Rome by some scholars.  The Roman Emperors were anti-Christian (Anti Christ) because they wanted everyone to worship them as gods; not Christ.

“Rome is the Antichrist because of the conflicting allegiance created among Christians by emperor worship (p. 126)”  (Thompson, Leonard L., The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire, 1990, pg. 15)

I think this illustrates how overly stereotyped the idea of devil (or the Antichrist) and god have become.  When placing the bible within its own historical and geographical context, the metaphors become more localized and real.    Thompson does well to do this and through his attempt to realize the actual local meaning of the Bible; specifically The Revelation of John.

Because Christianity has spread globally, to become the most followed religion in the world (Britannica Almanac, 2005) , it begs many questions as to why.  Why do so many people follow a book so out of date?  Professor Ogden has often referenced Hey Nostradamus (H.N.) for its internalization of the Biblical concepts of Heaven and Hell; along with the H.N. reduction of these concepts to be within each mind.  What made the bible a literary canon?  Why did the Book of Enoch (Noah’s grandfather)  not recieve as widespread following as the Bible?

The  Book of Enoch contained Astrology and was rich with metaphor and paganesque dream visions of godly animals and quasi-animal like imaginary creatures doing battle with one another.   Here’s what Noah’s grandfather (Enoch) dreamt about and recorded as a revelation of what the Apocalypse was in his Book Of Enoch:

“…the animal symbolism shifts to sheep; by means of fairly transparent symbols, the biblical story of Israel is told up through the restoration after the Babylonian Exile. Then new animals —eagles, vultures, kites, and ravens (the Greeks and their kingdoms) — oppress the sheep until a great horn sprouts on one of the sheep(Judas Maccabeus). With God’s help he successfully fights against the vultures,kites, and ravens. Then the Lord smites the earth, and gives a great sword to the sheep to kill all the beasts and birds. Eschatological judgment follows, during which “sealed books” are opened “in the presence of the Lord of the sheep.” A new temple is set up; all peoples come and worship the sheep, “making petition to them and obeying them in every respect.” Finally bovine symbolism returns with the birth of a snow-white cow with huge horns; all are transformed into snow-white cows, so that the eschatological finale returns to the Adamic vision. In Enoch’s panoramic historical review of the world from Eden to the new Jerusalem, the end time becomes the time of beginning. Then Enoch awakes from his vision.”

(Thompson, Leonard L., The Book of Revelation: Apocalypse and Empire, 1990, pg. 20)

I find it interesting that Christians were represented as sheep in Enoch’s dream.  As far as animals go sheep are traditionally seen as mindless followers, who require a shepard for protection and guidance.  It makes me wonder if this was not really a dream of Enoch’s but a carefully chosen metaphor.

Upon reading this interpretation of the Apocalypse however, from a book that inspired the writers of the Bible, it is shocking how distorted the Apocalypse has become.  All this time I thought of the Apocalypse as the end of the world.  Here it is with specific reference (according to Thompson’s interpretation) to the Maccabee revolt and the victory over Hellenization.   It is viewed as a new beginning.

“…the end time becomes the time of beginning.” (Thompson, pg. 20)

If anything Enoch is giving the Apocalypse as a reason for hope and a triumph of one paradigm over the other.  If the Apocalypse is thus simply an ideological triumph, then maybe an Apocalypse is on its way.  Maybe comics will become the holy scriptures two thousand years from today.   Maybe that will be the Apocalyptic paradigm shift.  From commandments to imagination.

my .o2 on art

Though there were many various artists selected throughout the Sandman series, the one story that I felt fit more of a comic book style was in issue 50 Ramdan. Everything from the landscaping, facial expressions, and character depictions looked more cartoon like than the rest of the previous and following issues. Maybe it was made so obvious as to give us a more “fantasy” feel that adds to the theme of wanting to eternally preserve something that was so perfect according to the protagonist Haroun Al-Raschid. Was this city preserved within the bottle Morpheus encased it in, or was it preserved through other non literal means like that of a story passed from generation to generation as portrayed by the homeless beggar who retells the story to a child. With story in mind the boy can hope for something brighter for his devastated neighborhood in Baghdad.

I also liked the lettering differentiation between the characters. It helps add character and personality that makes them a little bit easier to relate to and as Dr. Ogden has noted, this character to individual relationship is just as important as the plot itself. Take for example Destiny and his italics or Destruction’s heavy letters with black borders. We could almost infer what they would sound like if they could speak to us. Delerium suits her wacky font and colours and the raven Matthew sounds more bird-like talking with stick like words while adding almost a scratchy sound to it. Did anyone else feel this way consciously or subconsciously when reading what they had to say?

The Significant of Artworks in Graphic Novel

Volume nine, The Kindly Ones, of The Sandman’s collection was quite different. I was shock to see the changes in the illustrations of this volume of The Sandman’s collection. At first, I couldn’t bare reading the volume because the characters, mainly the protagonist, Morpheus, felt so different like it was another graphic novel. In my opinion, the new illustrations were done in square-liked features, which make the characters more animated than humanly-like. The old illustrations create humanly senses on Morpheus’ face, which brings the readers close to his character. My views towards Morpheus were all positive (or humanly) because throughout the volumes, we see him doing the right things and correcting the wrongs, taking his responsibilities and his anger, sadness, contentment on his faces. All humanly features that brought him close to the readers unlike the new animated and square-liked illustrations that lacks the humanly traits. I begin to wonder this change of drawings were like foreshadow towards the stories’ endings like a sign of the birth of the new Dream Lord. The square-liked features might be his (New Dream Lord) characteristics, which is different from Morpheus. Maybe Gaiman was trying to show juxtaposition. Also the new illustration of Morpheus creates a darker (or a bit evil) view. I was also a bit sad to read volume nine, The Kindly Ones, because I was somewhat attached to the character Morpheus. Like I mentioned above, my views towards him were all positive. Therefore, it was quiet sad to see the death of a good man (or a god?), which brings up the question of Good man dying (or losing) or the death of a god? Or if we all work the same way, the title won’t change and exist forever but the people or god will replace one another due to death or other situation.

The virgin suicide

The character Urania Blackwell found in issue #20 was such a waste of talent. She sort of reminds me of Rogue from the X-men. Rainie despises what she has become and becomes so caught up with her appearance that it’s all she can think about. Maybe Gaiman placed her in this situation to relate to those of us who feel we are only who we are because of the way we appear in front of others? Perhaps even overlooking the other talents and gifts that help define us, we try and conform to how others want to see us (as portrayed by the many masks in Rainie’s room). I recall Rogue too had once despised her powers because she could no longer come into contact with those she loved. However, she at least had the guidance from Xavier that allowed her to see the good that can come from her gift and learn to co-exist with the rest of the world. I think Gaiman could have come up with a more dramatic ending with such a unique character. She was practically immortal and had the capabilities of travelling to the highest and lowest parts of the planet, but I guess that wasnt good enough for her. Also, when she is visited by Death, Death could have tried to talk some sense into her but of course she doesnt because that would have been too predictable I suppose. So Death mentions to Rainie that she didnt come to see her because it wasnt her time, but really she plays some trickster mindgames and gets her to off herself by talking to Ra (the sun god) and asking him to make her normal again. In doing so Rainie turns to dust and then Death rubs it in by talking to her corpse and saying “have fun Rainie, better luck next time.” What a B#%*h! I think Death, like the other endless members, can’t be judged by their cover. She may look all cute and innocent but in this story, she was like the snake that decieved Eve in the garden of Eden showing her that instant gratification without explaining its consequences.

Wrapping it up

I started out being against religion in graphic novels but after these past few weeks of analyzing the graphic novel Sandman I’ve come to change my mind about it. I thought that religion had no place in graphic novels but after reading it more thoroughly I could see that the religious references Neil Gaiman has put in really stimulated my thoughts. It has opened up my mind about religion because it encouraged me to go out and actually read about religion instead of just having a perception, in my case an awful perception, of what religion truly represents. Even though most of my posts are how religion negatively affects the world, I also found many positive things that religion brought to the table. I only posted about negative things to fulfill my side of being against the use of religion in graphic novels.

As you can see from my first post I despised the idea of having to learn all the religious references throughout the graphic novel, but after that it started to grow on me once I knew more about these religious figures. If this were not an English course and someone just told me to read Sandman I wouldn’t have taken the time to learn all the religious references and just went with my first impression on what the graphic novel was like. I guess you can say that religion in graphic novels only appeals to a certain audience – an audience that already knows about religion. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that religion should be condemned from ever being in a graphic novel medium.

Possibilites

Episode 4 of Season of Mists seems almost to be a side story of the effects of Hell closing up and everyone being kicked out. There are two boys who have died and the one refused to go with Death to the afterlife because his friend who returned from Hell was not able to join. They do not want to stay with the recently-dead’s body so that she (Death) will not find them. They head out and talk about seeing what “life’s got to offer” (140). This is an interesting thought about no real difference between life and death I found. They can still go out and enjoy EVERYTHING that they did when they were alive they just simply aren’t alive. This brings in the whole comment on ghosts, those who just never leave the world realm, those who never leave the world completely. This is an interesting suggestion for how ghosts happen even when there are plenty of clearly designated areas for them in the afterlife. This book proposes endless opportunities in the afterlife. You can go to the Heaven or Hell of any religion, there is even a re-incarnation at the end, or you can just remain in the world without issue. Why shouldn’t a comic book put some ideas of such out there? If they want to discuss the issues then they should discuss them. The deeper they get into any issue gives it all the more respect as art pieces. This book really seemed to take the dominance concepts out of religions. All of them acknowledge the others existence and seem to respect they all take care of their own issues to a great extent. With so many possibilities there is no one right argument.