Methodology

The distinction between the narrator and the focaliser can be observed in the words. Because comics mainly contain direct language and little structuring sentences, focalisation is rarer there than direct thought or speech (it is far more common in writing). Comics usually do not have enough room for long narrator comments, in which focalisation occurs. It seems that focalisation in comics is usually in the images, and direct thought in the words. The danger in such an analysis, however, is in being too strict in separating word and image in comics. Just saying that the image in Jimmy Corrigan is focalised and the language is direct thought is not accurate. We have discussed how Ware places narrated words in the image (without balloons or other markers) and how the words in this scene have an imagelike quality. The strong direct thought thus penetrates the more neutral image, not by its meaning, but by its presence and, in effect, adds to the subjectivity. The meaning of the image is not just enhanced or elaborated on by words, it is changed as well.

Now, for an interesting example of the tension between words and images, let us take another look at l’Ascension. We mentioned that most of the word boxes in this comic contain comments by an adult David reflecting upon his youth. We will look at page 48, which has seven panels, all accompanied by a word box (figure 14). The words in the first word box acknowledge the presence of the narrator clearly, when the reader is invited to ‘play’ and recognize the elements of ying and yang in the image. The narrator makes perfectly clear he is telling a story by addressing the audience directly, and that he is using images as well as words to do so. The relation between word and image is different in the other panels, though. The words in panel 2 through 7 are a rather straightforward description of macrobiotics. The images here are depictions of the associations David has with the words. These words could function in their own right as a rather dry summary. It would be very difficult, however, to understand the relation between the images without the words. Panels 2 through 7 have a strong associational and allegorical character. David relates ‘la grande vie’ in the box to internal organs in the image, and subsequently imagines ying and yang as the two sides of the brain. He then continues to regard the role of cereals; first as a character fighting a monster, and then as a cure for an actual disease (obesity). In the last two panels he focuses on sleeping; first simply on the act, then on what is happening inside the sleeper’s head. To understand this, the words are required. The presence of the images is not optional to the story however; they give the reader a crucial insight in David’s thought process. A very interesting question here is whether these images are focalised by the narrator (the adult David), or the character (the younger David). On the one hand, the narrator comments on the images as if he is directly responsible for them (in the first panel). However, the images also have a childish naivety and grotesqueness, which seems more likely to stem from the young David – the awkward perspective of the legs of the monster in panel 4 is a good example. This ambiguity in focalisation often arises in retrospective stories. It reminds us that memories are always influenced by our present perception.

Emotions

We have discussed how thoughts are displayed verbally. The more primary emotions are usually presented graphically in body language however, and entire codes have been developed for this. Film actors usually exaggerate their bodily movements to convey the emotions and mood of their character. Comic characters can be manipulated more easily, because they are drawn, and their stances are usually exaggerated even further. Of course, this is taken to its limits in humoristic comics; humoristic films have the most expressionistic body language as well. Albert Uderzo (Astérix), Franquin (Gaston, Spirou) and Carl Barks (Donald Duck, Uncle Scrooge) are artists renowned for their mastery of expressionistic posing. The poses are not to be understood normally as representations; they can only be decoded in the light of comic conventions. The character’s bodies become symbols, which shows that images also resembles language in comics. A standardized set of exaggerated poses reads almost like an alphabet, where each has a distinct meaning for an experienced reader. We should not think more serious comics shun away from presenting their characters in nearly ridiculous poses. Comics may not be a medium of gesture like ballet or pantomime (Metz; 26), but Eisner makes ‘a micro-dictionary of gestures’ and even maintains that ‘[i]n comics, body posture and gesture occupy a position of primacy over [words]’ (102 –103).