Twokinds ARCHIVE Forums

Hi,

I'm new to the site, and when I saw that a book was being made, this was my first stop. I've read the manga Twokinds from start to finish yesterday afternoon, and I'm amazed by the structuring of the characters and the attributes they express. But anyways, back to the topic on hand.

Depending on what kind of book you intend to write, the literary elements and the structure must be well defined (or at least must be clear within the author's mind.) The genre, which I assume is romance, has a particular structure that is derived from Shakespeare's model of literature (drama, comedy, tragedy and romantic.) From what I've seen in the manga, Twokinds is a hybrid between drama and romantic literature. Given that, the structure and integrity of the plot should be relatively easy to formulate if you can draw up the "blueprints"

What I did notice from the comics is that the overall plot seemed out of place from character development. Books, I've found can rely on the story of character relationships rather than plot development (Diana Gabldon's novels) or its usually carried by the general philosophy of the plot in which the author tries to convey (Frank Herbert's novels.)

Will the book be presented like a novel, or will the illustrations be mostly prevalent and appear like a book of comic strips? If its between 150-170 pages long, then I would assume that some sort of compromise would have to be made between the wording and the drawings (should it turn out to be a novel in structure)

I hope this input was helpful, and I look forward to reading the final product!

It's a collection of the comic, not a novel.

Ohh, okay. Well, in terms of story, my critique still stands. I found that there was a lot that was left unexamined, but if its just a collection of comics then it might not be that important.

Or it could be original rather than "literary."

Do you mean my criticism is original, or the basis itself? I don't quite follow.

It's a referance to something I read where a radio host kept asking about "literary" matters and authors (by that, he meant classical liturature), while the authors being interviewed all concentrated on where public interest was: nonfiction.

Well, the customer is always right. If authors feel they need to appeal to their readers, then that really is their business. The radio-host guy might have gotten the wrong impression... or didn't do his homework before the interview I guess. Though he did have the right idea to ask about theory; I mean most writers will talk about the process of writing at least once in their lives.

I find that it holds pretty true the the necessities of writing. primarily Character, conflict, desire.

This is necessary for any story but a luxury in the web comic world.

On top of that he's delivering a moral message, which is something that many modern writers don't even do.

As for sticking to a structure I'll agree that most works are 10000 times better if the writer sticks to a poetic structure and doesn't just get the feelings down on the page.

However modern literature the poetic structure is almost never used. No novels are written in spencerian sonnets or iambic hexameter or anything. Because it doesn't sound right to the modern toungue. Even if you are writing a modern poem, many poets don't use a structure (which i hate.)

So if novelist can't even get good use of poetic structure I don't know how you expect someone to use poetic structure for a comic.

Unless you're talking about structure as in the division of the comic into sections which i think is naturally done in web comics via the ending of a story arc.

I just have an Associates Degree in Language Arts so maybe my education on the matter is limited.

One last thing. In writing as with all art the "rules" are just suggestions. Normally works come out better if the rules are obeyed however some people disobey them and win. The most important thing is if the audience likes it and if the artist's message is conveyed.

As Ernest Hemmingway said, "Kill your darlings." Which means don't destroy something good because you're trying to make it look poetic and cute. Structure and technique is secondary to theme, story, character, desire, conflict, & plot

In addition, writing comics is (I assume) like writing an anthology of short stories. They don't necessarily have a foreseeable end, and since this is true story structure and integrity are always being tweaked and adjusted to adapt to the whole.

By the way, Hemingway was a genius of satirical and tragic literature, though he was often quite foolish (because he was an awful drunk) and eventually shot himself.

I am not an editor, so my perspective beyond enclosed pieces of literature are somewhat limited.

Yeah, Hemingway would have been a greater writer if he didn't drink.

No no... the customer is not always right, in fact the customer is usually uneducated and generally apathetic, and willing to believe whatever the advertisments say. If the world says, you will all like nonfiction, the vast majority will, if the world says, you will all like fiction, the vast majority will. Anyone who says the classics aren't good is a fool, if they weren't good, they wouldn't still be around. They speak to something deeper than our throw away garbage novels. There are no new stories, only retellings of the old ones, the art is in the reworking and the weaving in of new ideas. The greatest stories barrow from the themes of the classics, look at Star Wars for example.

That's beisdes the point, and straying off topic. The thread said literary criticism. Yet somehow when you found out it was a comic, that changed something. A comic is a work of literature, as much as literature is a work of art. Look at Sandman.

While it is dificult to critique a piece that is still in motion, the question remains, literary criticism of Two Kinds:

A) The Point
A story must have a point which the plot and characters are wrapped around. A story written for the sake of entertainment only is doomed. The stated point of Two Kinds I believe was racial issues. It's also bleeding into war. Great points, with many, many valuable lessons in them. However, they are hard points, disgusting points, and people generally don't like to look them square in the eye. But the best stories with these points force you to stare at them, bare and brutal. IE Saving Private Ryan. Tom has yet to force us to look at something truelly ugly. Flora was a slave, but her masters weren't all that bad. Eric is a slaver, but he's not cruel. There's a war going on, a WAR, and what is there to show for it? Nothing, as of yet. No price has been paid, by anyone. If the readers are to feel, to connect to the story, we've laughed enough, now make us cry. There must be contrast for a story to be great. One of the characters, whom we know, whom we care about, must pay somekind of price. Be it Trace loosing Flora to his own ambition, like Darth Vader, or some other unforseen calamity. If no price is paid, if no lesson is learned, then the story is worthless.

B) The Audience
Who is Two Kinds written to? The notes above on the point can only be truly carried across if they are in fact hard to face. Personally I believe our children are too sheltered in this day and age, a practice that generally back fires. But that's just me. So, who is it written to?