I want to find the first American graphic novel—I say American simply because I know very little about comics of other countries; so put down your Tintins and your ACK hardbacks, and let’s see where this leads us.
Yes, I love the Archive! I'm also a semi-serious collector, although, since these texts fall somewhat outside my wheelhouse, and for financial reasons, I relied on reprint volumes for the unArchived texts.
Ha ha, I agree! I've got shelves full of DVDs—in part so my kids can put Bugs Bunny on by themselves without borrowing my phone but in part because online things…disappear.
God’s Man strikes me as, pretty obviously, the first American graphic novel. It is unclear to me why anyone would think otherwise. I can’t make sense of the idea that it can’t be a graphic novel because the author didn’t think of it as a graphic novel. “A thing cannot be X because its creator didn’t think of it as X” strikes me as a self-evidently weak argument.
Well, as I said I can see an argument for it, and I cant really complain if someone picks it; but I think this raises an interesting quibble about definitions.
Obviously Ward could not have thought of his book as a graphic novel because the term graphic novel didn’t exist. When the term graphic novel was invented, God’s Man would (arguably) not have been considered a graphic novel. By the time Understanding Comics came out, everyone was primed to see G’sM as a graphic novel. But this shifting definition isn't the real issue.
It’s like when people talk about the first super hero, and someone says Gilgamesh and someone else says The Scarlet Pimpernel. I say Superman, not because Gilgamesh or SP are wrong, but because they are, in some sense marginal; perhaps I should say non-central. Superman is central.
And G’sM is non-central. A wordless book with one panel per page and no penciler isn’t disqualified from being a graphic novel. But it’s so tangential to the graphic novel tradition! Rhymes with Lust looks in many ways (not all ways; it’s B&W) like 95% of American graphic novels of the last thirty years; God’s Man looks like 1% of them.
How close to “center” does a work have to be to qualify as a representative? That’s kind of a judgment call (and that’s the point I was trying to wrestle with). I guess I’d ask if Jeremiah Saddlebags should be the first American graphic novel, since, in a post-McCloud world, it is also a graphic novel.
Mansion of Evil can be read here: https://digitalcomicmuseum.com/index.php?dlid=33408
You, sir, are a hero!
Very cool. Do you do your research fro these through the Internet Archive?
Yes, I love the Archive! I'm also a semi-serious collector, although, since these texts fall somewhat outside my wheelhouse, and for financial reasons, I relied on reprint volumes for the unArchived texts.
Ah that's awesome. I'm a big advocate for keeping and collecting physical media these days.
Ha ha, I agree! I've got shelves full of DVDs—in part so my kids can put Bugs Bunny on by themselves without borrowing my phone but in part because online things…disappear.
The original version of It Rhymes with Lust can be read here: https://digitalcomicmuseum.com/index.php?dlid=27911
God’s Man strikes me as, pretty obviously, the first American graphic novel. It is unclear to me why anyone would think otherwise. I can’t make sense of the idea that it can’t be a graphic novel because the author didn’t think of it as a graphic novel. “A thing cannot be X because its creator didn’t think of it as X” strikes me as a self-evidently weak argument.
Well, as I said I can see an argument for it, and I cant really complain if someone picks it; but I think this raises an interesting quibble about definitions.
Obviously Ward could not have thought of his book as a graphic novel because the term graphic novel didn’t exist. When the term graphic novel was invented, God’s Man would (arguably) not have been considered a graphic novel. By the time Understanding Comics came out, everyone was primed to see G’sM as a graphic novel. But this shifting definition isn't the real issue.
It’s like when people talk about the first super hero, and someone says Gilgamesh and someone else says The Scarlet Pimpernel. I say Superman, not because Gilgamesh or SP are wrong, but because they are, in some sense marginal; perhaps I should say non-central. Superman is central.
And G’sM is non-central. A wordless book with one panel per page and no penciler isn’t disqualified from being a graphic novel. But it’s so tangential to the graphic novel tradition! Rhymes with Lust looks in many ways (not all ways; it’s B&W) like 95% of American graphic novels of the last thirty years; God’s Man looks like 1% of them.
How close to “center” does a work have to be to qualify as a representative? That’s kind of a judgment call (and that’s the point I was trying to wrestle with). I guess I’d ask if Jeremiah Saddlebags should be the first American graphic novel, since, in a post-McCloud world, it is also a graphic novel.
So...what is it that rhymes with lust?
Rust (the name of the femme fatale).