TRUTH
“truth is an abstract concept at best easily disengaged from fact.” Glockner P, “Autiobiography the Process negates the Term” in Graphic Subjects (ed) Chaney M J (University of Wisconsin Press, 2011) pp 178-179 (p178)
In this final section we consider what strategies are employed by these texts to make these stories seem authentic and truthful. The problem with defining autobiography as a genre is that it is distinct from both biography and fiction yet retains aspects of both. Beaty B, “Autiobiography as Authenticity” in Heer, J. & Worchester, K. (eds) A Comics Studies Reader (University of Mississippi Press, 2008) pp 226-235 It's claimed that all autobiography are inherently flawed as it is impossible to remove the subject from the object Beaty B, “Autiobiography as Authenticity” in Heer, J. & Worchester, K. (eds) A Comics Studies Reader (University of Mississippi Press, 2008) pp 226-235. This impossibility of removing the self section bias when it comes to reminiscences means that autobiography always tends to complicate notions of “truth” and “self”. Ibid., p228
In Fun Home Bechdel use of actual photographs is described by one researcher not of creating “artificiality” but artifactual meaning. Watson J, “Alison Bechdel Fun Home” in Chaney, M (ed) Graphic Subjects(Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2011) pp123-155 (p144) Bechdel herself states in an interview that the use of real material is to make the reader trust that what they are reading is the “truth” Interview with Alison Bechdel, Gender Across Borders, a global femminist blog . Photo realistic art then when used with personal prose is an interaction then between memory (a subjective recollection) and photography (an objective form of documentary evidence). Watson J, “Alison Bechdel Fun Home” in Chaney, M (ed) Graphic Subjects(Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2011) pp123-155 (p149) Bechdel's use of real documents makes her story all the more “truthful”. Although since she replicates them using art she claims that the version of reality she has rendered is just her version and is not the real one. Brown Spiers M “Daddy's little girl: Multi generational queer relationships in Bechdel's Fun Home” in Round, J. and Murray, C (eds), Comics as Autobiography -Studies in Comics, 1.2 (Intellect, 2011) p317
Photos referencing is also used to great effect in Alan Moore's The Birth Caul. Even though the photos used by Eddie Campbell in this work are, probably, stock photos they are selected well and when combined with Moore's lyrical words they make the scene real and believable. Another photo used to great effect is the reveal in Maus of Vladek in his Auschwitz work uniform. Spiegelman A, Maus II p294 This photo punctuates the Jews as mice allusion, reinforces the authenticity of the work and at once confirms the story and makes you empathise all the more. Ultimately, although artefacts that are part of autobiographical comics, such as photos and personal correspondence, lend credibility to a work they are also potentially flawed as by reproducing them using artistic techniques turns the real into artifice. Schneider C W, “Young daughter, old artificer. Constructing the Gothic Fun Home”, in in Round, J. and Murray, C (eds), Comics as Autobiography -Studies in Comics, 1.2 (Intellect, 2011) pp 233-255 (p347)
Comics are not only art. The style of writing also conveys the truth of the message. The personal voice in stories like Maus or Persepolis, or in the rants of Harvey Pekar are accepted as truth. Beaty B, “Autiobiography as Authenticity” in Heer, J. & Worchester, K. (eds) A Comics Studies Reader (University of Mississippi Press, 2008) pp 226-235 (p230). Part of the success of autobiographical comics is the common assumption that autobiography and truthfulness are one and the same. Ibid, p231 However, accentuating the real life experiences to make it sound more exotic and therefore a more exciting work is common practice. In The Mighty John #1 the author is chastised for making job experience sound more interesting so as to subtly empathise the similarities between the creator and Douglas Adams. The Mighty John #1, p11 Bechdel, who litters her work with literary name dropping uses her excellent grasp of literary works to define her self. Whitlock G, “Autographics: the seeing "i" of the comics”. Modern Fiction Studies, 52 (4) (Winter 2006) p 971 This cherry picking of her own history to highlight the similarities between herself and legendary fictional characters means that she is “shaping herself through her discipline”. Ibid, p 972
It is not only a one-way process. Dave Sim in interview has complained that he found that he was unable to get his character Cerebus to say certain dialogue. For him the character had a life of his own. Ibid, p 972 Another autobiographical author, Phoebe Gloekner, described the creative process of “delivering myself of myself” and of creation being a form of slow “suicide”. The suggestion being that the life slowly drains from her as her characters grow in strength- a literal parasitoid stealing life from it's creator. Glockner P, “Autiobiography the Process negates the Term” in Graphic Subjects (ed) Chaney M J (University of Wisconsin Press, 2011) pp 178-179 (p179) Now, although this is undoubtedly hyperbole the principle seems to be that although the creation is the not creator it is definitely a draining and intimately personal experience at times. In Cerebus the series reflects personal experiences in Sim's life although Sim denies that Cerebus is any kind of avatar for himself. He argues that his appearance as Dave in his comic is the equivalent to the role played by Bugs Bunny at the end of the classic Daffy Duck cartoon where Daffy is tormented by the omniscient Bugs. Sim then is another character within the universe- a creation no more real than Bugs Bunny is in this universe.
This the “creation is not the creator” Glockner P, “Autiobiography the Process negates the Term” in Graphic Subjects (ed) Chaney M J (University of Wisconsin Press, 2011) pp 178-179 (p179) is at the heart of the debate within the Mighty John #1. The reality of the authorship of the story is confronted directly with dialogue between characters trying to highlight this question of truth. Here again it is reiterated that the representation is not the actual person and to mistake the two is to mistake the map for the territory. Use of photos in the strip help foster the belief that the story it tells, and the character of “John,” is a real representation. However, as mentioned earlier this is an ultimately futile exercise as any work of artifice must be shaped consciously and unconsciously by the hand of the creator. Even the objective “opinion” page in the Mighty John (originally intended to be real people and genuine opinions expressed on author based on six primary emotions) is flawed. Since for expedience sake the strip used the test subjects from the experiment and arbitrarily made up dialogue to fit in with the emotions expressed the page is transformed from objective opinion to subjective conceit.
There is no doubt that autobiographical comics are personal works that give an insight into the creator. However the problem with all autobiography is that the observer and the creator are one in the same. The mix of subjective memory with the concrete fixing through a work of art means that the author is at best indirectly represented. The creators use many techniques such as photographs, reproduction documents and breaking the 4th wall to make the reader believe what they say is real however this is only an illusion and readers should be aware that although autobiographical comics have the appearance of reality they are not.