interesting to note how there shadows seem to morph into one person. Perhaps a commentary about how shared trauma can bring people together even if they have no other grounds for a relationship?

Just realized if Jon experiences time in a nonlinear way, then he is probably maybe abel to experience/relive that accident in the chamber and be complete helpless to stop it.... that's rough. :(

Interesting to note that most of his story is anchored around his destruction in the chamber. If time is fractured around the trauma for a trauma victim then it makes sense that that moment would be an anchor for all of Jon's story to revolve around.

I know it's been said before. But I really do think it is interesting the way Jon's destruction and following isolation from humanity parallels that of a trauma victim. I kind of feel bad that I didn't pick up on it. After having it pointed out it seems like it was so obvious, but I guess that is hindsight. Someone mentioned in slack that feeling oblivious to Jon's trauma symbolism made them feel like they contributed to his isolation. I agree with that. And I feel like it might have been in someways the intent of Moore. I mean, I remember mentioning in class that Jon was isolated due to his lack of morality. With this context though it really puts his lack of morality into perspective. If after traumatic experiences people feel cut off, shut down, and withdrawn and the Jon's amorality isn't because he's a god like super human, but because he is a very real human who can't process the emotion and reality of what happen to him.

Not to mention, no one in the story tries to help him. They just weaponize him. Meanwhile we don't even try to help him, we just pegged him as a super human god.

I saw his robotic personality as a product of his super human "enlightenment" not his traumatic experience of being ripped apart on a molecular level... but this context changes that. And the fact that I feel like I helped keep him isolated from the rest of us by pegging him that way only strengthens Moore's commentary.

flagging for further discussion

eyyyy that's amusing. In a circular panel, talking about going around in circles... I didn't notice that the first time through.

I'm not sure I understand here what the difference is between looking at the scene and seeing the scene

bit we still process that sequence as the elephant moving closer... interesting taking that in context of the reading on closure from a couple days ago that we fill those gaps. We could see it as a series of stills, but we (or atleast I) process it as movement.

is he suggesting that if we finished the image it would make it more difficult to process, not easier?

I think this is an interesting extension of 'blood in the gutter". I never thought to look at it as a sidderence between symbolic and real.

really looking forward to this. I read a lot of comics for fun, and love talking about them in a critical context. It's going to e really cool, for me, to actually do it for a grade.

I saw this book in the book store my first semester way back when, and told myself I was going to take the class it was taught in before leaving mary wash. So I am pretty excited to study it in a critical context.

Well, that was a roller coaster from start to finish.

what a loyal dog.

I think it is intersting on how illustration here implies the passing time, and the words do very little. obviously this didn't happen over night. look at that horse.

And then it gets really dark again, and I feel bad for laughing at this guy. But because of the way the tone is so consistent, I feel as if there is a bait and switch here in which the narrator makes this seem comical, and then is like "oh wait no this is super dark and you shouldn't be laughing.". I feel like I signed up to read a comedy, but no. This is serious commentary on suicide. This is an actual reason that people kill themselves, unrequited love, and it shouldn't be laughed at. Just the way it's presented it almost hides the fact that there is a serious commentary here that should be addressed.

Again I find myself laughing at this guy. He has the worst luck. I know this sounds terrible, but because of the way this story has been presented (like how I can't take Oldbuck seriously) I almost want him to keep screwing up for my own amusement.

That is oddly specific.

Definitely getting the feeling here that no one is on this guys side. Not even the Horse. Maybe the narrator is on his side, but that's about it. I don't even feel like as a reader that I am rooting for him, but rather looking at his misfortune as one giant joke, and he's the punchline.

what an optimistic narrator. Oldbuck wants to kill himself, and the narrator is almost glad that he keeps failing. what a stand up guy.

It's been kinda' mentioned already that this page does a really good job of using art to tell the story while let the language take a back seat. I think that is a really cool thing about graphic novels. That language can sometimes take a back seat.

aaaaaaaand here it is. Study is ineffectual. Or was he just going about it the wrong way?

okay, so is he studying love? Like is he reading love poems, and Shakespeare', or a deep in depth psycho analytical analysis on feelings and love? Further more, can you learn love from a book? I think that brings up a very valid discussion point as to what is love. Can be it be learned? Is it scientific enough to "conquer" through a text? I mean obviously this is a dry read so I haven't read ahead. So this may be totally irrelevant, but interesting nonetheless.