October 15, 2012
Simplistic or Dynamic
As I look back at McCloud's claim of amplification through simplification I don't know if I completely agree with what he states. The more simple the depiction is the more I can identify with it because I can in turn see myself in the image. That made sense to me at the time. After reading Arab in America I have formulated the idea in my head again and it doesnt make as much sense. I feel that if the cartoons drawn in Arab in America were drawn as simplistic that I would have no idea how to identify with them, I would not be able to tell the characters apart in a book about individualism. This is a book that is trying to explain the turmoil of a living in a society that pinpoints you as the "other" or enemy because of your appearance. How can I identify with that notion if the drawings were simplistic. In the book each character is drawn to meet the specifications of a stereotype so that I can identify with them thus making them more dynamic than simplistic. Doesn't this contridict McClouds simplistic claim? Do I identify with things better because they are simple? Or do identify with things better because they are more detailed? They both seem to make sense at this point.