“Graphic novels are serious literature.” This is simply a statement of the adult nature of graphic novels. Graphic novels are not meant for children to read, nor are they meant for younger teens either. Instead of defining serious literature in the terms of Hamlet, one can safely say that graphic novels are serious literature because they contain topics that are explicit or inappropriate for some readers.
“Burning a nation’s flag is a hate crime.” Hate crime is defined formally as “a crime, usually violent, motivated by prejudice or intolerance toward a member of a gender, racial, religious, or social group.” Since a nation could be considered a social group, burning their flag would be categorically defined as a hate crime.
“The [Obamas] have become America’s royal family.” (I replaced “Bushes” with “Obamas” because of the appropriate context.) While America does not actually have a royal family, the President and his family are the closest to that. They are a family that nearly everyone in the nation respects, they are in the news constantly, and since Barack Obama is the president, he is a leader of the nation—just as a royal person is recognized as a head of a country.
“Matt Drudge and Larry Flynt are legitimate journalists.” Blogs are a new part of journalism. They are as informative as most news sites—they are opinionated, but so are editorials. Drudge and Flynt can be labeled as journalists because they post about issues that are seen in the news just as other news sites and newspapers do.
“Plagiarism can be an act of civil disobedience.” Plagiarism is by all means an immoral act. Using other peoples’ papers, etc., is frowned upon as stealing. It can be called civil disobedience because plagiarism can harmful to the public good.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think that while what you say could be one accurate description of serious literature in the context of graphic novels, I think it could be taken further to mean that serious literature could also include works of recognized literary merit (such as the Nobel Prize in literature) or could be interpreted in other ways.
ReplyDeleteI would argue that the Obama family is not a royal family. If you take into consideration styles of government, the Obama family, more specifically Pres. Obama only represents the people and, while he does make specific decisions, he doesn't have the power of a monarch. I understand that "royal family" can be interpreted in different ways, but I would not see them as a royal family. If anything I would simply consider them political celebrities.