Look, I'm not saying that commenting on media representations of women is a waste of time, or that the slightly sarcastic comments of the writer don't suggest a residual, sly feminist humour, but it's all getting a bit too 'First World Problem' for me. I know that the press is full of dumb-asses who don't know what is a story and what is a thinly concealed excuse for printing a picture of a curvy babe... and I keep getting these adverts for Russian women in my area who want to date older men whenever I get click-baited...
Sorry.
Finally, when do we have an authentic instance of a comic?
I argue that comics (even digital comics) are best understood as autographic—they admit of referential forgery and direct transcription will not suffice to produce an authentic instance of a comic.
This is all about whether it is possible to forge a copy of a comic: to make a version of the comic that refers to a source, presents itself as being the source, and can get sold (I presume) for the same price as the source, if you sucker an expert or a thirteen year old who really needs that Fantastic Force #12.
Apparently, you can.
Okay, to sum up, here's how a comic exists, according to me via remorseless theft of Mekin's source article.
A comic exists as a multiple - simultaneous copies exist, all of which count as 'the event'.
There is a source, a manuscript, against which each multiple can be judged.
It is possible to forge a copy of the multiple.
I've lost the best bit of Meskin, though: his encoding style of replication offers a potential conflict with the possibility of it being forged (if no manuscript exists, how can it be forged et c).
All sorts of fun stuff here, but I found this thing about countering sexist arguments about the representation of women in comics (and it has that add for Russian women, too)....
No comments :
Post a Comment