The movie - Birdman, by large, is centered around a single theme - Labels! To list a few which you come across in the movie:
1. Comic Books and literature
2. Theater Actors, Movie Stars and Critics
Let's begin with the first one - Comic Books and Literature.
Literature in the broader sense of the word is any written text. Of course if you were to draw a thick line with barbed wires on the spectrum of written text, marking where "literature" ended, it would be drawn just before where Sidney Sheldon or Chetan Bhagats of the world started. Rest of written text falls under the 'popular' category, which is a nicer word for saying - your vocabulary is not large enough to understand what is written by Amitav Ghosh/ James Joyce. Other way of looking at it will be to say that your emotional intelligence is at par with a hormonal teenager, and you have still not grown up to be a part of the real world (of course here I am keeping all the non-fiction works out of the scope of this blog) .
Comics have been though more of a roller coaster ride. Comics typically stand on three pillars - morals, imagination and wit. A super hero will always have strong moral values. Stories have clear heroes , villains and what is right from what is wrong. The story will be built upon strong imagination by the illustrator, the writer and the reader. Lastly, a good comic book always has good punchlines and a strong sense of sarcasm and wit ( take for example Calvin and Hobbes). Over the period of time, comics grew to become graphic novels, it became more serious. Morality started getting shades of grey, imagination gave way to reality, colored underwear which always attracted too much attention became less noticeable. Comic books suddenly became the badge of honor worn by the nerd and the artist alike.
Now is the real clincher- is comic book/ graphic novel as a work of art equivalent to literature? To put in another context - Is Waltz with Bashir or Dark Knight as good when compared to Hamlet or Schindler's List?
Take for example this story of a young orphan boy who is brought up in a distant land away from his home. He is discriminated for who he is and the only way for him to lead a normal life is to hide his true identity. He doesn't know where he is from and beyond a point can't trust anyone, because he is not one of them. This could well be the plot for next Khaled Hosseni book, or the story of Superman. The only difference is that the instant the book cover reads - Khaled Hosseini, literary bugs will talk about how this kid's foster parents symbolize the absolute sense of morality which is increasingly lost in this changing fabric of society, how this kid grows to become the beacon of hope for an entire generation lost in their self centered world and how Khaled seemingly got inspired by Geeta, as this kid doesn't seek wealth or gratitude for his work, he just does it because he thinks it's his calling.... So on and so forth. However if this book comes with a big artwork of superman and finds its space in the graphic novel section of Crosswords, is when all these depths and layers are lost instantly. "A picture says a thousand words" doesn't hold true in context of comic books.
In my opinion, this is how labels work in context of art. Over a period of time we have resorted to a convenient style of living where everything comes with a label. Be it a book or be it a movie. A super hero comics is not art, it's "popular art". We are comfortable not making our own judgement about the true worth of a book. We would much rather go by what the critics have to say, or the label on the book shelf. Riggan who played Birdman was forever labeled as a Film star, who had to live up to his super hero character he played on screen. Several actors have ended being labeled as a particular type, because we like it when our world looks familiar and fit our labels. And we resent when those labels are broken or changed. What Riggan says as his ending lines on his Broadway production captures his disappointment towards his fans - for who he sacrificed everything - his personal ambitions, his personal life , living the character they wanted him to be, only to find that those fans had moved on, leaving him with an unfulfilled life and a steadily depleting bank account.
Does that mean that all that is written in comic book is of great artistic value? No, absolutely not. Biggest problems of "Popular art" is that it becomes formulaic. After a point it becomes repetitive, and lacks originality. Comics are built on grand plots- mostly which involve world wide/ inter galactic/ inter universe scale destruction. Real characters are often sacrificed on the altar of plots. This is what differentiates a good graphic novel from a bad one. Just like literature, there is a spectrum of work available, all of which not good, but then all of it is also not bad. But then, to summarily reject everything on the basis of one small sample set is like giving up reading after reading - 3 mistakes of my life.
To sum it, I feel that both literature and comic books have their place in the world of expressions and art. What is wrong is to approach either with preconceived notions. What is wrong is to judge others on the choices they make, and feel superior by showing the other art form inferior. What is wrong is to pose and try and be something you are not. What is wrong is to read and not feel; is to see but not imagine; look at the cover but not what is inside!
1. Comic Books and literature
2. Theater Actors, Movie Stars and Critics
Let's begin with the first one - Comic Books and Literature.
Literature in the broader sense of the word is any written text. Of course if you were to draw a thick line with barbed wires on the spectrum of written text, marking where "literature" ended, it would be drawn just before where Sidney Sheldon or Chetan Bhagats of the world started. Rest of written text falls under the 'popular' category, which is a nicer word for saying - your vocabulary is not large enough to understand what is written by Amitav Ghosh/ James Joyce. Other way of looking at it will be to say that your emotional intelligence is at par with a hormonal teenager, and you have still not grown up to be a part of the real world (of course here I am keeping all the non-fiction works out of the scope of this blog) .
Comics have been though more of a roller coaster ride. Comics typically stand on three pillars - morals, imagination and wit. A super hero will always have strong moral values. Stories have clear heroes , villains and what is right from what is wrong. The story will be built upon strong imagination by the illustrator, the writer and the reader. Lastly, a good comic book always has good punchlines and a strong sense of sarcasm and wit ( take for example Calvin and Hobbes). Over the period of time, comics grew to become graphic novels, it became more serious. Morality started getting shades of grey, imagination gave way to reality, colored underwear which always attracted too much attention became less noticeable. Comic books suddenly became the badge of honor worn by the nerd and the artist alike.
Now is the real clincher- is comic book/ graphic novel as a work of art equivalent to literature? To put in another context - Is Waltz with Bashir or Dark Knight as good when compared to Hamlet or Schindler's List?
Take for example this story of a young orphan boy who is brought up in a distant land away from his home. He is discriminated for who he is and the only way for him to lead a normal life is to hide his true identity. He doesn't know where he is from and beyond a point can't trust anyone, because he is not one of them. This could well be the plot for next Khaled Hosseni book, or the story of Superman. The only difference is that the instant the book cover reads - Khaled Hosseini, literary bugs will talk about how this kid's foster parents symbolize the absolute sense of morality which is increasingly lost in this changing fabric of society, how this kid grows to become the beacon of hope for an entire generation lost in their self centered world and how Khaled seemingly got inspired by Geeta, as this kid doesn't seek wealth or gratitude for his work, he just does it because he thinks it's his calling.... So on and so forth. However if this book comes with a big artwork of superman and finds its space in the graphic novel section of Crosswords, is when all these depths and layers are lost instantly. "A picture says a thousand words" doesn't hold true in context of comic books.
In my opinion, this is how labels work in context of art. Over a period of time we have resorted to a convenient style of living where everything comes with a label. Be it a book or be it a movie. A super hero comics is not art, it's "popular art". We are comfortable not making our own judgement about the true worth of a book. We would much rather go by what the critics have to say, or the label on the book shelf. Riggan who played Birdman was forever labeled as a Film star, who had to live up to his super hero character he played on screen. Several actors have ended being labeled as a particular type, because we like it when our world looks familiar and fit our labels. And we resent when those labels are broken or changed. What Riggan says as his ending lines on his Broadway production captures his disappointment towards his fans - for who he sacrificed everything - his personal ambitions, his personal life , living the character they wanted him to be, only to find that those fans had moved on, leaving him with an unfulfilled life and a steadily depleting bank account.
Does that mean that all that is written in comic book is of great artistic value? No, absolutely not. Biggest problems of "Popular art" is that it becomes formulaic. After a point it becomes repetitive, and lacks originality. Comics are built on grand plots- mostly which involve world wide/ inter galactic/ inter universe scale destruction. Real characters are often sacrificed on the altar of plots. This is what differentiates a good graphic novel from a bad one. Just like literature, there is a spectrum of work available, all of which not good, but then all of it is also not bad. But then, to summarily reject everything on the basis of one small sample set is like giving up reading after reading - 3 mistakes of my life.
To sum it, I feel that both literature and comic books have their place in the world of expressions and art. What is wrong is to approach either with preconceived notions. What is wrong is to judge others on the choices they make, and feel superior by showing the other art form inferior. What is wrong is to pose and try and be something you are not. What is wrong is to read and not feel; is to see but not imagine; look at the cover but not what is inside!
