Page 1, Page 2, Page 3, Page 4, Page 5, Page 6, Page 7
Brief response to my comic, "The Quest for Sir Arthur"
I found Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s belief in fairies quite interesting, as well as ridiculous. I wanted to satirize that his convictions were entirely based on doctored photographs. I did not (and still do not) understand why such an intelligent man made such assumptions with so little proof. Thus I thought it would be both hilarious and appropriate to reverse the situation. I created two fairies, one of which believed in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, the other a skeptic.
In order to create some semblance of a detective story, I took into account the Ellery Queen yardstick—a detective story that contains a detective who detects, who must be the protagonist, and must triumph over the criminal. I had a hard time thinking of a story that fit into that mold, so I used only certain aspects of the yardstick formula. I also considered the Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, in which Mr. Utterson pursues the bizarre circumstances surrounding Dr. Jekyll on a hunch and meager observations, much like Doyle’s conjecture about fairies. The pink-haired fairy—the protagonist—leads a skeptical fairy around to find an elusive Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, to no avail. It reflects the absurdity of an unsubstantiated hunch, like that of Doyle, Sharpin (in The Biter Bit), and Utterson.
I also wanted to briefly comment on gender roles in Victorian society. The pink-haired fairy, portrayed by my (male) friend Tyler, is dressed in a tutu, tights, skin-tight shirt, and a pink wig with a crown. A woman—Holly—depicts Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in a suit and bowler hat, and dons a moustache. Both defy the traditional female/male standard that Victorians so heavily stressed.
Essentially, I wanted to make fun of Doyle’s ludicrous claims on the existence of fairies. But, like in most of the stories we have read, there is also a serious element under the impractical.
I was sooo curious since you told me about the comic. And I love it! I especially like that "Doyle" seems to be so real, contrary to the "fact" that he is only an imagination by the pink-haired fairy. "Doyle" is so self-evidently in the pictures, just as if he secretly makes fun of the fairies. This questions the relation between imagination and reality in a pretty interesting way. Great job!
ReplyDeleteHannah this is amazing! I love how you switched the roles of the fairies and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and turned it into a super-cute comic! I love how "Doyle" is hiding in the background ever so sneakily, too!
ReplyDeleteI knew it would turn out awesome. You did such a good job with everything. =]
ReplyDeleteWhat can I possibly say to this, your very crafty comic? Wonderful! It certainly made me laugh, and I loved the fact that you inverted the Conan Doyle/Fairy relationship. This inversion provided a good opportunity to play with and challenge the “Ellery Queen Yardstick,” as well as reveal certain characteristics of Victorian life. However, I remain a bit puzzled about the gender issues you wished to raise. While I appreciate the fact that you switched the genders for the two characters you mentioned, you want to be careful to assume that male/female roles were as strict as you say they were in the Victorian era. Of course, we have the history of Shakespearean theatre to look at, which immediately throws into question “traditional” gender roles. And I wonder about your focus on Conan Doyle’s belief in fairies. Why, exactly, do you think it so ludicrous? I kept waiting to read the rationale behind the ridicule. All this is to say that I wanted a bit more explanation for a couple of your final claims. But I did appreciate the idea that detective fiction contains “a serious element under the impractical.” This read to me like a great thesis for your explanatory prose.
ReplyDelete