Note to self (and, maybe Howard Gardner): I am by no means a visual learner. “The Vocabular of Comics” gave me a headache. That was one of the most all over the place pieces I’ve ever tried to read. It didn’t help that all I kept thinking was that the guy in the comic resembled Dave from Alvin & the Chipmunks. I had to re-read the dialogue about the pipe and how it “wasn’t really a pipe” 20 times before I got what “Dave,” if you will, was saying. And, who in the free world doesn’t think a circle with 2 dots and whatever you want to call what we perceive to be the mouth, is NOT a face!?! Yeah, I got the part about how I probably wouldn’t want to read the cartoons had the little guy been drawn completely life-like, but I don’t think it benefitted me all that much either. I was thinking to myself, “OMG, just give me 20 pgs of something theory-heavy and in block format!” I found the part about the sword gradually becoming more realistic interesting, because I easily see and think of comics that are examples of what the author is saying. Still, my confusion persists….I never really read comics. When I was very young and there used to be a Barbie comic, I read that. But, that was mostly to see who Barbie was going out with and when the new dollhouse was going to be released. My point, if it’s really a point, I’m not sure, is that I just had a difficult time reading something that was so messy. I’m sure to some it was perfectly unmessy and sequential, but I spent more time reading this than the article on MUDs.
