A comparative discussion on filmic and visual narrative techniques

INTRODUCTION
Comics and films are both visual mediums by which the creator of the comic or film conveys an idea to the reader or the audience. This however is the only similarity between the two because films and comics utilise different visual narrative techniques that enable them to communicate information. The articles by De Grauwe and Ault further reiterate this fact as both these authors identify and discuss the different narrative techniques used by these two genres of communication.

This essay attempts to present a comparative paper on the visual narrative techniques used by films and comic books as identified by Donald Ault and Sophie De Grauwe in their articles entitled “Imagetextuality ‘Cutting Up Again” and “The Possibility of Minimal Units in the Filmic Image” respectively.

Ault, using Bark’s Narrative strategies and some of Lacan’s categories puts forward that comics make use of imaginary, symbolic and real visual narrative techniques as they relate to the gaze, which is identified as seeing in different context yet at the same time being able to see as a whole(Ault, 8).

According to Ault the imaginary is the visual images of the comic page while the symbolic is the language or words used to convey ideas. The real is communicated by the interruptions or spaces on the page (Ault, 2). These visual narrative techniques used in comics can not be separated and are used simultaneously in comics, as exemplified in the work of Carl Bark on which Ault offers a lengthy critic (Ault, 14).

In an analysis of the minimal filmic units De Grauwe uses the social semiotic approach based on Halliday’s systemic –functional theory as well as Kress and Van Leeuwen as a point of departure (De Grauwe, 1).

According to Halliday Semiotic systems are comprised of the interpersonal, textual and the ideational metafunction because such systems are tasked with expressing the experiential world through ideas or representational metafunctions, semiotic systems project, social relations, and they achieve this by the use of frames, angles, moving cameras and speech acts (De Grauwe, 3).

De Grauwe discusses minimal filmic units from the perspective of Metz who identifies the existence of different cinematographic codes, namely segmental units which are units that occupy a continuous segment of filmic space and time such as the object being filmed and suprasegmental units, which are more abstract like the role of colour in the filmic time and space.

Eco classify three articulations in film specifically kinesic, iconic signs and figures, De Grauwe disagrees with this approach and states that in normal viewing circumstances the kinetic figures can not be discreted by human perception. Furthermore De Grauwe puts forward that Eco’s classification is faulty in that as much as Eco claims that iconic figures do not form part of the signified iconic signs. This can said to be faulty because these figures have an inherent referential meaning, because it is possible for minimal filmic parts to refer to features or parts of the referent due to iconicity.

Groupe ‘u’ proposed an analysis of the still image by distinguishing between iconic and plastic signs De Grauwe is of the opinion that the iconic has a basis within the visual parameters of the plastic sign and that the difference between iconic and plastic meanings and subdivision does not prevent integration.

After an analysis of the positions of Metz Eco and Groupe ‘u’, De Grauwe identifies discreteness, abstraction, iconity, economy and arbitrariness. As the minimal units of filmic visual narrative, in that discreteness is create by relative contrast whereas iconicity can be retained by means of a flexible and socially determined concept. Arbitrariness which involves gradational scales is often influenced and limited by economy though to a small extent in the cinematographic system. The filmic image is less suitable for abstraction; however strategies such as changes in colour or texture can be employed to manipulate reality (De Grauwe, 21).

CONCLUSION

Though comic and filmic visual narratives utilise different techniques to convey ideas it cannot be concluded in this comparative essay that the techniques used by one medium is more effective or superior to the other because though the two are different they are both able to portray social relations in the manner in which the creator/producer intends them to. In the current diverse world system we are in, there is a need to have various methods of conveying ideas so as to be able to capture the attention of a different audience and one believes that the filmic and comic narrative are both able to do so because of their inherent differences in style.