**Right click view on image to enable zoom**
Unlike Laurie Sandell's The Imposter's Daughter, Gabrielle makes Lucky's words
 and pictures work in tandem. Imposter's Daughter could have been read 
without the images, and as stated in class was a completed 300+ page 
manuscript prior to becoming a graphic memoir. Bell makes Lucky's Images integral. I don't think she could 
do it any other way. While Sandell is a writer using pictures and text 
to tell a story, Bell is a comic artist. Okay, more comparisions to 
Sandell later.
Mostly I want to point out the call and 
response technique Bell employs. She often begins with a heading. This 
is so prevalent, I'm just going to open up the book and find one. Ok, 
third panel on page 30: "I applied for a job at a high-end clothing 
store. I had to start somewhere, although I felt like something the cat 
dragged in." Then she will follow the heading up with dialogue, an image
 of the action that illustrates what she was just describing, or an image
 that decodes or complicates what she said in the heading. On page 30, 
she picked dialogue: "Now tell me, why are you interested in working for
 Ann Taylor?" "Well, I particularly like their clothing line. I can't 
afford to buy it new but I always look for it at thrift stores." The 
narrator comments on her word bubble by writing "pathetic lie" next to 
it with an arrow. This technique made me look at the text and images of 
Lucky equally, like I was stumbling forward. Each item under the 
heading, be it a picture, some dialogue, pictures with dialogue, serve 
as punchlines, following through with more than we expected, and after 
the first few pages, knowing there will be more calls and responses, I'm
 hooked. 
The way Bell draws her faces with just beady 
eyes and a line for a mouth requires Scott McCloud to be brought in. In 
his book, Understanding Comics (I recommend reading it, yesterday) he 
spends a lot of time talking about realistic drawing vs. cartoon drawing
 and the different affects they have on a viewer. One tidbit: "When two 
people interact, they usually look directly at one another, 
seeing their partner's features in vivid detail. Each one also sustains a
 constant awareness of his or her own face, but this mind-picture is not
 nearly so vivid; just a sketchy arrangement, a sense of shape, a sense 
of general placement. Something as simple and basic-as a cartoon. Thus 
when you look at a photo or realistic drawing of a face, you see it as 
the face of another. But when you enter the world of the cartoon, you 
see yourself"(36). He goes on saying more awesome stuff. But this is 
what Bell does, I IDENTIFIED with her, and I hardly know anything about 
her. 
It isn't until page 39 of Lucky that we get any 
information about Bell's upbringing: "I was reminded of the times when 
we hitchhiked to school because our parents were too hungover to drive 
us". We don't know if she relayed this memory to her brother or not, but
 his text responds to the idea of what she told us: "You know, 
considering our upbringing, we did pretty well for ourselves". This 
makes a dialogue between her internal monologue and his external one. 
Throughout
 Lucky, Bell shows how important comics are to her, which takes on a 
meta quality, something she likes to do a lot, something that gives her 
ultimate control over her world, which from the outside she could be 
perceived as a victim of. On page 50, in a modern art museum, she 
divulges that she would have liked "some pictures to look at on the way.
 Particularly pictures arranged in a sequential order that would tell a 
story". She eats and breathes comics. She draws herself into her own 
comic. Maybe she's more of a self as a comic. 
In closing, 
comparing Lucky to The Imposter's Daughter again, I noticed there's no 
sex in Lucky. (Maybe I wouldn't have noticed if there hadn't been so 
much sex in ID!) I don't realize this until page 98 when Bell is 
wrestling with how to greet people in French and she seems so 
uncomfortable. Will she ever get an opportunity to utilize these skills?
 Yes, she will. Read The Voyeurs. 

Sailor! I just wanted to thank you for adding McCloud's panel to your post. It helped my perception and analysis of "Lucky" tremendously, and I can't help but agree with his statement. In a sense, I don't "see" myself, but I do have this immediate and direct connection/relatability because of Bell's minimalistic approach. Again, thanks for providing his brief panel. It makes you think about perception in general, how babies form identity and attachment by formulating awareness via the simplistic "happy face," and what it means when we process perception, our faces, and artistic representation and realism this way.
ReplyDelete~melissa
Great blog post! I didn't really think about the absence of sex in the book, and I'm really glad that you pointed it out, because I'd love to have a discussion in class about that. Gabrielle also seems uncomfortable with the expression of sexuality during the lesbian performance art scene on page 24 come to think of it. Your suggestion to read Voyeurs in that context makes me think that the reader finds out something interesting about Bell's own sexuality. Does she go to France to experience sexual liberation?
ReplyDelete