The Way I Read a Picture

Hi! I wrote the following rant to post on fanstory.com. I haven't done it yet because I thought it needed some tweeking. I really want to bawl the heck out of those monkeys. So, if anyone has any thoughts on how I can add a little more fuel to the fire - please comment. Now, without hesitation - my rant:

This is a page out of a Japanese manga called ‘Gokusen’ by Morimoto Kozueko. It is read left to right if you’re not familiar with manga. In the manga Kyo is trying to convince Shin to wear a fundoshi and participate in a local festival. Shin is reluctant and so Kyo decides to show him a picture that Kumiko (Ojou) drew. He’s saying that if Shin wants to prove his manhood to Kumiko then he has to wear it, but his first method seems to shock and horrify Shin rather than convince him.

A great deal can be portrayed through a picture and thus through someone’s imagination. The thing that confuses me here is why so many authors choose to exhibit pictures with their work, possibly as a form of advertisement, possibly to showcase their work, possibly to dress it up, when the art seriously detracts from their intent. You see, Kyo honestly believes that showing Shin this picture will convince him to participate in the festival, but instead Shin is only shocked and creeped out. In the end, it is Kyo’s words that convince Shin and not the picture at all. I think that this is a perfect example of what happens here on fanstory everyday.

When I go through the ‘Up Next’ section, I look for things that might be interesting to me. Nineteen times out of twenty a graphic is displayed with a piece of poetry that is so outside my interests and tastes that it doesn’t matter what the author has written, I’m not going to stick around and read it. The problem with this is that I might have been very interested in their writing if it hadn’t been for the graphic. I clicked on the words they wrote, didn’t I? I wanted to read their writing, didn’t I? But I was driven away because of a hideous picture that narrows the landscape of their writing so viciously as to make me go back to the ‘Up Next’ section without reviewing. This leads me into two important points. One is about advertising and the other is about imagination.

Authors may wish to include a graphic to add a little flare to make their writing appear more appealing – a form of advertising. I can see why authors might want to do something to make their writing stand out when it’s so hard to get more than three people to read your writing on a site like this, but I disagree that it helps. The thing with advertising is that the reader has to click on your writing before they can see the graphic. There is no option to post a picture with your title like with a book cover. The reader has already read the title, the pickup line, possibly the synopsis and chosen to click on the link. I don’t think they need to be sold on the writing any further. The rest is up to the writing.

Next is the infringement on imagination. I am probably a complete loser, but I don’t think I would have started to read like a maniac if I didn’t have this charming ability to make everyone in the book I was reading look exactly the way I wanted them to. That has got to be what I truly love about reading and about writing; the ability to let your imagination take you to where it wants to go. I am almost of the opinion that books shouldn’t have covers. I used to rip the covers off books all the time because the picture on the front spoilt my illusion. They say that you can’t tell a book by its cover. I think they’re wrong. The better authors get better artists to draw their covers. In an amateur setting, such as this one, where people are honestly striving to become strong authors, some lame graphic stolen randomly off a google image search hardly seems to fill the bill. It robs the author of the chance to create a picture in my mind with their words. Instead, they don’t need to say anything – the picture has already shouted louder than their amateur poetry or prose ever could.

It’s also amazing how many authors ‘borrow’ famous art without leaving proper credits and have no idea what the picture is of in the first place. If someone didn’t know who Mickey Mouse was and used that picture here to illustrate their poem, it would be ridiculous. Yet it astounds me how often authors snag pictures from popular foreign cartoons and anime without having any idea what that picture means or what connotations are already attached to it. Or they borrow the work of a genius, which is just as bad. A piece of art that is protected behind glass at the Louvre stands alone and only pales what might be showcased here. The poem may have been charming if only it wasn’t overshadowed by something so unanimously brilliant. The comparison is painful.

Lastly, I want to say that in most cases (I know there are some contests here where someone writes something based on a picture) a picture should not be necessary. A good author will tell the reader what they want them to see. Nothing else should be required. If art is needed, there are plenty of other mediums that use both art and writing – like ‘Gokusen’. That story cracks me up.